|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Dec 16, 2020 18:39:53 GMT -8
Yeah you're clearly not understanding what I'm saying at all. Maybe you can try again man. It's not about people being able to do literally anything. It's about teams being able to accomplish their goals. The first time around people said I needed to add a better prospect and a pick this year. So I did. I added exactly those things in the second attempt. Then you guys listed my roster guys like Zegras, Drysdale, etc., as if you'd only allow it if those listed places were involved, even though they had nothing to do with negotiations with Boston. That's what got me upset. I added what I was asked to and then the revised attempt got rejected anyway because specific pieces were wanted by the mods. Go back and look yourself. Please do not misrepresent me. Go back yourself and have a peak at what was said. Nobody is forcing you to add anyone. You yourself asked what needed to be added, and that’s what was done, someone posted and said, try giving up one of your real prospects, not these garbage ones you are including. Maybe give Boston a prospect that will help his team, not his AHL team. You don’t want to though, you’d rather just try and add some more picks and more lower prospects. It’s way overdue to stop valuing picks and prospects more than top players, like it or not. It doesn't seem like you're reading what I'm saying bro LOL. Whatever, I'm not gonna bother anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by wynne on Dec 16, 2020 18:55:01 GMT -8
Go back yourself and have a peak at what was said. Nobody is forcing you to add anyone. You yourself asked what needed to be added, and that’s what was done, someone posted and said, try giving up one of your real prospects, not these garbage ones you are including. Maybe give Boston a prospect that will help his team, not his AHL team. You don’t want to though, you’d rather just try and add some more picks and more lower prospects. It’s way overdue to stop valuing picks and prospects more than top players, like it or not. It doesn't seem like you're reading what I'm saying bro LOL. Whatever, I'm not gonna bother anymore. I’m reading everything you’re saying, you just think you’re making more sense than you are. You keep bundling all the mods into the same group. Just because one guy says one thing doesn’t mean I or another mod agree with it. I never said add another pick, or that DeBrincat isn’t valuable and I’m not changing my story on each trade. I’ve been consistent the whole time, you just don’t like it, but don’t batch everyone together but only argue with 1. I can go back and start quote posting your stuff so there’s no argument if you want. You said trade mods specifically said no deal unless Drysdale or Zegras are added, except nobody said that. Buffalo gave you a list of valuable prospects you could add to make it fair, after you asked. You go on about teams should be able to go in a direction they want, but not do whatever they want because that’s different. Well you said Boston only wants Gaudette because it’s his favourite player, that seems like a want. You don’t need to respond, but stop acting like everyone else is out to lunch. This isn’t the first time you’ve been apart of a trade where you’re giving up a long list of spare parts for high quality players, and there’s a reason those ones were rejected too. You‘re overvalue picks and prospects. |
|
|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Dec 16, 2020 19:03:24 GMT -8
It doesn't seem like you're reading what I'm saying bro LOL. Whatever, I'm not gonna bother anymore. I’m reading everything you’re saying, you just think you’re making more sense than you are. You keep bundling all the mods into the same group. Just because one guy says one thing doesn’t mean I or another mod agree with it. I never said add another pick, or that DeBrincat isn’t valuable and I’m not changing my story on each trade. I’ve been consistent the whole time, you just don’t like it, but don’t batch everyone together but only argue with 1. I can go back and start quote posting your stuff so there’s no argument if you want. You said trade mods specifically said no deal unless Drysdale or Zegras are added, except nobody said that. Buffalo gave you a list of valuable prospects you could add to make it fair, after you asked. You go on about teams should be able to go in a direction they want, but not do whatever they want because that’s different. Well you said Boston only wants Gaudette because it’s his favourite player, that seems like a want. You don’t need to respond, but stop acting like everyone else is out to lunch. Thread 1 general consensus: add first this year and better prospect. I do that. Thread 2: some people think the value is there for Pasta but still think Rask is more valuable than what's being involved. I disagree only with the claim about Rask being valuable enough to warrant adding more because of his bad performance and upcoming downgrades. Then mods suggest I add prospects like in that list despite ones like Vegas suggesting the value for Pasta is there. "Except nobody said that..." except they mentioned them and made lists. Hypothetically that trade would have been accepted if I took out Rask. I considered doing it but we wanted to see how this would work. I didn't say Boston ONLY wants Gaudette... I said he also really wants him. To quote specifically, I said this: "And he really wants Guadette because that's his favorite player lmao." In the previous threads I never complained about Pasta's evaluation, I just thought the valuation for Rask was silly. You literally misquoted me man, so let's please just end this here |
|
|
|
Post by wynne on Dec 16, 2020 19:11:45 GMT -8
I’m reading everything you’re saying, you just think you’re making more sense than you are. You keep bundling all the mods into the same group. Just because one guy says one thing doesn’t mean I or another mod agree with it. I never said add another pick, or that DeBrincat isn’t valuable and I’m not changing my story on each trade. I’ve been consistent the whole time, you just don’t like it, but don’t batch everyone together but only argue with 1. I can go back and start quote posting your stuff so there’s no argument if you want. You said trade mods specifically said no deal unless Drysdale or Zegras are added, except nobody said that. Buffalo gave you a list of valuable prospects you could add to make it fair, after you asked. You go on about teams should be able to go in a direction they want, but not do whatever they want because that’s different. Well you said Boston only wants Gaudette because it’s his favourite player, that seems like a want. You don’t need to respond, but stop acting like everyone else is out to lunch. Thread 1 general consensus: add first this year and better prospect. I do that. Thread 2: some people think the value is there for Pasta but still think Rask is more valuable than what's being involved. I disagree only with the claim about Rask being valuable enough to warrant adding more because of his bad performance and upcoming downgrades. Then mods suggest I add prospects like in that list despite ones like Vegas suggesting the value for Pasta is there. "Except nobody said that..." except they mentioned them and made lists. Hypothetically that trade would have been accepted if I took out Rask. I considered doing it but we wanted to see how this would work. I didn't say Boston ONLY wants Gaudette... I said he also really wants him. To quote specifically, I said this: "And he really wants Guadette because that's his favorite player lmao." In the previous threads I never complained about Pasta's evaluation, I just thought the valuation for Rask was silly. You literally misquoted me man, so let's please just end this here Like where do you get that general consensus? 1 person said better prospects and picks this year not next, 1 person, so how is that consensus? Second trade, again, Philly accepted and Vegas thought there was enough for Pastrnak, nobody else, so 2 people. Canes didn’t think it was enough for him, neither did Habs, that was the focal point, neither of them even mentioned Rask, so you’re wrong about that again. I’m not misquoting you at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Montreal Canadiens GM on Dec 16, 2020 19:17:26 GMT -8
I’m reading everything you’re saying, you just think you’re making more sense than you are. You keep bundling all the mods into the same group. Just because one guy says one thing doesn’t mean I or another mod agree with it. I never said add another pick, or that DeBrincat isn’t valuable and I’m not changing my story on each trade. I’ve been consistent the whole time, you just don’t like it, but don’t batch everyone together but only argue with 1. I can go back and start quote posting your stuff so there’s no argument if you want. You said trade mods specifically said no deal unless Drysdale or Zegras are added, except nobody said that. Buffalo gave you a list of valuable prospects you could add to make it fair, after you asked. You go on about teams should be able to go in a direction they want, but not do whatever they want because that’s different. Well you said Boston only wants Gaudette because it’s his favourite player, that seems like a want. You don’t need to respond, but stop acting like everyone else is out to lunch. Thread 1 general consensus: add first this year and better prospect. I do that. Thread 2: some people think the value is there for Pasta but still think Rask is more valuable than what's being involved. I disagree only with the claim about Rask being valuable enough to warrant adding more because of his bad performance and upcoming downgrades. Then mods suggest I add prospects like in that list despite ones like Vegas suggesting the value for Pasta is there. "Except nobody said that..." except they mentioned them and made lists. Hypothetically that trade would have been accepted if I took out Rask. I considered doing it but we wanted to see how this would work. I didn't say Boston ONLY wants Gaudette... I said he also really wants him. To quote specifically, I said this: "And he really wants Guadette because that's his favorite player lmao." In the previous threads I never complained about Pasta's evaluation, I just thought the valuation for Rask was silly. You literally misquoted me man, so let's please just end this here If anything you’re misquoting us, I told you to take off the fluff and give him some of your actual top prospects, I didn’t say shit about Rask. But you’re right, it’s over, it’s rejected, let’s leave it at that. |
|
|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Dec 16, 2020 19:19:11 GMT -8
Thread 1 general consensus: add first this year and better prospect. I do that. Thread 2: some people think the value is there for Pasta but still think Rask is more valuable than what's being involved. I disagree only with the claim about Rask being valuable enough to warrant adding more because of his bad performance and upcoming downgrades. Then mods suggest I add prospects like in that list despite ones like Vegas suggesting the value for Pasta is there. "Except nobody said that..." except they mentioned them and made lists. Hypothetically that trade would have been accepted if I took out Rask. I considered doing it but we wanted to see how this would work. I didn't say Boston ONLY wants Gaudette... I said he also really wants him. To quote specifically, I said this: "And he really wants Guadette because that's his favorite player lmao." In the previous threads I never complained about Pasta's evaluation, I just thought the valuation for Rask was silly. You literally misquoted me man, so let's please just end this here Like where do you get that general consensus? 1 person said better prospects and picks this year not next, 1 person, so how is that consensus? Second trade, again, Philly accepted and Vegas thought there was enough for Pastrnak, nobody else, so 2 people. Canes didn’t think it was enough for him, neither did Habs, that was the focal point, neither of them even mentioned Rask, so you’re wrong about that again. I’m not misquoting you at all. You literally misquoted me about Gaudette as I just showed. "You should be getting Drysdale or Boqvist at minimum." You said this. And bro I've already decided I'll figure it out or not make the trade, it's fine. Just wanted to see how the trade mods valued lots of picks in this deal vs having DeBrincat. It's clear this league values stuff a lot differently than all the other leagues I've been in lol, it's fine Also, I wasn't talking about Montreal mentioning Rask... Other mods did... |
|
|
|
Post by Toronto Maple Leafs GM on Dec 16, 2020 19:29:14 GMT -8
I thought this was a pretty good trade. So I'd accept it. 3 1sts, couple B level prospects, not a bad haul.
|
|
|
|
Post by wynne on Dec 16, 2020 19:48:43 GMT -8
Like where do you get that general consensus? 1 person said better prospects and picks this year not next, 1 person, so how is that consensus? Second trade, again, Philly accepted and Vegas thought there was enough for Pastrnak, nobody else, so 2 people. Canes didn’t think it was enough for him, neither did Habs, that was the focal point, neither of them even mentioned Rask, so you’re wrong about that again. I’m not misquoting you at all. You literally misquoted me about Gaudette as I just showed. "You should be getting Drysdale or Boqvist at minimum." You said this. And bro I've already decided I'll figure it out or not make the trade, it's fine. Just wanted to see how the trade mods valued lots of picks in this deal vs having DeBrincat. It's clear this league values stuff a lot differently than all the other leagues I've been in lol, it's fine Also, I wasn't talking about Montreal mentioning Rask... Other mods did... That’s not misquoting, you’re nitpicking. Gaudette isn’t part of direction for anyone, he’s a 4th line center, Boston wanted him in the trade because it’s his favourite player, that’s a preference, which is absolutely fine, but doesn’t make it a fair trade because he really wants a certain player I said to Boston he should be getting Drysdale or Boqvist in a trade for his most valuable asset, not that the trade wouldn’t go through without them, so not sure why you’d quote that, you’re trying to insinuating something. You keep going on about misquoting as you constantly do it. |
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Avalanche GM on Dec 16, 2020 20:08:24 GMT -8
So we're going to allow Edmonton to accept any trade that comes his way simply because he wants the deal? That's such a shit argument lol, if that's the way it was having trades be voted on would be completely pointless. Boston wants to tank and trade away his best players? More power to him, but when he can very easily get multiple blue chip prospects for Pasta we're not going to let him get swindled by you throwing a bunch of picks and jobbers at him. You're right, DeBrincat is valuable, but him alone is nowhere near Pastrnak in value, and he was probably the most valuable piece you were offering up. If you legitimately want Pastrnak then actually give him quality, not just quantity. Stop submitting 5 trades trying to pussyfoot around the issue of you actually giving fair value. Uh no, this isn't what happened nor is it what I'm saying. The actual revised attempt literally included what you guys wanted to make it fair value and you still changed your minds about it anyway. This attempt here was to see how the changes would be valued relative to the previous trade. You guys have a tendency to insult people when you reject trades. It's really immature for you guys to call trades complete shit and insult the people involved. That's not your job lol. Your 2nd attempt wasn't even close to what we were talking about. You took Debrincat out and screwed yourself. As soon as he was gone it was going to be a whole new drawing board. You can dance around this all you want but filling it with fluff doesn't make it any better. |
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Avalanche GM on Dec 16, 2020 20:09:56 GMT -8
Like where do you get that general consensus? 1 person said better prospects and picks this year not next, 1 person, so how is that consensus? Second trade, again, Philly accepted and Vegas thought there was enough for Pastrnak, nobody else, so 2 people. Canes didn’t think it was enough for him, neither did Habs, that was the focal point, neither of them even mentioned Rask, so you’re wrong about that again. I’m not misquoting you at all. You literally misquoted me about Gaudette as I just showed. "You should be getting Drysdale or Boqvist at minimum." You said this. And bro I've already decided I'll figure it out or not make the trade, it's fine. Just wanted to see how the trade mods valued lots of picks in this deal vs having DeBrincat. It's clear this league values stuff a lot differently than all the other leagues I've been in lol, it's fine Also, I wasn't talking about Montreal mentioning Rask... Other mods did... You haven't been in any of the leagues that the rest of us have been in then?? |
|
|
|
Post by Calgary Flames GM on Dec 16, 2020 20:22:20 GMT -8
You literally misquoted me about Gaudette as I just showed. "You should be getting Drysdale or Boqvist at minimum." You said this. And bro I've already decided I'll figure it out or not make the trade, it's fine. Just wanted to see how the trade mods valued lots of picks in this deal vs having DeBrincat. It's clear this league values stuff a lot differently than all the other leagues I've been in lol, it's fine Also, I wasn't talking about Montreal mentioning Rask... Other mods did... You haven't been in any of the leagues that the rest of us have been in then?? Bro you guys keep going on and on lmao I was in Hockey Sim Leagues or whatever...prospects and picks were a lot more valuable there. Also this was thread 3 not 2. Stop attacking me when Toronto and Philly find this one fair anyway lmfao. You guys are seriously beating a dead horse by now, thread is over |
|
Oct 12, 2021 15:02:10 GMT -8
Oct 12, 2021 15:02:10 GMT -8
vs 
Live , Detroit looks to end things and take their 2nd Cup in 3 seasons
Oct 10, 2021 17:22:20 GMT -8
Live now m.twitch.tv/thewhalers28
Oct 10, 2021 16:35:48 GMT -8
vs 
vs 
Oct 10, 2021 11:26:42 GMT -8