Who would turn down 10 first round drafts picks for AO or Sid?
Who would offer 10 first round picks?
Untouchable is a status you give to a player when you have no interest in trading him.
Trading Tlusty, Stralman, Kulemin, 1st round picks, etc... at this point make no sense, and are counter-productive to the direction we should be heading in. Obviously you would trade them for a Crosby (theoretically not making ANYONE "Untouchable"), but no one is going to give you that offer.
Untouchable is a status you give to a player when you have no interest in trading him.
Trading Tlusty, Stralman, Kulemin, 1st round picks, etc... at this point make no sense, and are counter-productive to the direction we should be heading in. Obviously you would trade them for a Crosby (theoretically not making ANYONE "Untouchable"), but no one is going to give you that offer.
Here are mine:
#1) Anton Stralman
#2) Jiri Tlusty
#3) Tomas Kaberle
#4) Vesa Toskala
#5) Nikolai Kulemin
#6) 2008 1st round draft pick
#7) Alexander Steen
#8) Justin Pogge
that about sums it up....
pogge is far from untouchable though. kaberle is movable for the right price.
So you are discussing someone who is not likely to get the return, not untouchable. There is a difference. Right now someone like Alfredson would be untouchable for the Sens. With them gearing up for a cup run, there's no point in even offering anything. He's too big a part of their room. Brodeur is untouchable as well, for the same reasons.
Who would turn down 10 first round drafts picks for AO or Sid?
But a team would never make that offer. Those two guy's value is so high that there isn't a team in the league who is able or willing to pay it. That makes them untouchable for all intents and purposes.
In the case of a guy like Anton Stralman, who is at the top of most people's lists, they certainly would take a couple first round picks for him, but odds are there isn't a team willing to give up near that much for him, so therefor, he is for the most part untouchable. It just means what you would demand for him exceeds what other teams would likely be willing to pay for him.
Nit-picking about the language used just kills the discussion. You know what the thread is about, just roll with it.
So you are discussing someone who is not likely to get the return, not untouchable. There is a difference. Right now someone like Alfredson would be untouchable for the Sens. With them gearing up for a cup run, there's no point in even offering anything. He's too big a part of their room. Brodeur is untouchable as well, for the same reasons.
Yes, they are big parts of their current team.
But my point is after you made the 'Toews for Stralman' or 'Tlusty for Kane' "deals," I tried to use the "deal" that I made to explain to you that any of those offers would be highly unlikely from either teams.
But my point is after you made the 'Toews for Stralman' or 'Tlusty for Kane' "deals," I tried to use the "deal" that I made to explain to you that any of those offers would be highly unlikely from either teams.
Seems like you still don't understand. Alot of things can happen. Some players can't re-sign or the situation changes. Look at a guy like Jack Johnson. I'm sure he would have been untradeable in your eyes, but he was traded. None of those guys are even close to untouchable. None are proven, none are top picks, none are even top prospects.
This is a list of players we don't want to see traded, unless it's an overpayment. Not a list of untouchables.
But a team would never make that offer. Those two guy's value is so high that there isn't a team in the league who is able or willing to pay it. That makes them untouchable for all intents and purposes.
Huh?
Then why would you talk about the '5 1st round picks for Stralman,' when you know that it is highly unlikey any team would do it. Please, maybe you can follow your own logic one day?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Hoser
In the case of a guy like Anton Stralman, who is at the top of most people's lists, they certainly would take a couple first round picks for him, but odds are there isn't a team willing to give up near that much for him, so therefor, he is for the most part untouchable. It just means what you would demand for him exceeds what other teams would likely be willing to pay for him.
And don't you think Pittsburg would be willing to take the 10 first round picks from a team desperate to win "now"?
You just described my point to you perfectly, "but odds are there isn't a team willing to give up near that much for him, so therefor, he is for the most part untouchable....."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Hoser
Nit-picking about the language used just kills the discussion. You know what the thread is about, just roll with it.
I am the thread starter, so I know what the thread is about. No need to tell me what should I do, since I am in an arguement with a poster "WITHIN" the discussion topic.
But my point is after you made the 'Toews for Stralman' or 'Tlusty for Kane' "deals," I tried to use the "deal" that I made to explain to you that any of those offers would be highly unlikely from either teams.
While those deal are unlikely, you might see a 3 for 1 deal to bring in a young star to this team.
Would you really turn down a deal like this:
Toskala, Kaberle and 1st rounder 2008 for Lecavlier + mid round pick.
I would still make that deal in a second. I'm sure Tampa would as well. They get the goaltender they need, the defenceman they need AND a very high prospect in return. The cap would be a wash as well.
While those deal are unlikely, you might see a 3 for 1 deal to bring in a young star to this team.
Would you really turn down a deal like this:
Toskala, Kaberle and 1st rounder 2008 for Lecavlier + mid round pick.
I would still make that deal in a second. I'm sure Tampa would as well. They get the goaltender they need, the defenceman they need AND a very high prospect in return. The cap would be a wash as well.
I would do it, but my point is toward EazyB97 who made some ridiculous examples, and I tried to prove my point by also writing out some ridiculous offers. Seems to me that both of us are in agreement of some sort.
Seems like you still don't understand. Alot of things can happen. Some players can't re-sign or the situation changes. Look at a guy like Jack Johnson. I'm sure he would have been untradeable in your eyes, but he was traded. None of those guys are even close to untouchable. None are proven, none are top picks, none are even top prospects.
This is a list of players we don't want to see traded, unless it's an overpayment. Not a list of untouchables.
My point is, Toews for Kulemin won't happen because it is highly unlikely either team will offer for it.
And I was expecting something like this from you when I used the "Crosby for 10 1st round picks" example that I used. That's all.
My point is, Toews for Kulemin won't happen because it is highly unlikely either team will offer for it.
And I was expecting something like this from you when I used the "Crosby for 10 1st round picks" example that I used. That's all.
I understand your point completely. I'm just saying it isn't untouachable. Either way, get back to your thread, I've answered it. Your message is clear, but all of these guys should be moved if the right deal comes along.
I would do it, but my point is toward EazyB97 who made some ridiculous examples, and I tried to prove my point by also writing out some ridiculous offers. Seems to me that both of us are in agreement of some sort.
Yes we are except for the untouchable part. I think some of those players will be moved in a future deal. I have the feeling Fletch will do everything possible to get two young established stars (center and winger) before the start of next season.
If it takes 3 youngsters in one deal and 3 in another, he'll do it. Remember how he went out and got Glen Anderson then Gilmour. Then when Glenny wasn't giving an elite effort anymore, he went out and got Andreychuk.
Having an elite duo IMO is necessary in any team rebuilding. He should be able to get more then enough picks/prospects back from other players to lessen the blow to our prospect pool.
Yes we are except for the untouchable part. I think some of those players will be moved in a future deal. I have the feeling Fletch will do everything possible to get two young established stars (center and winger) before the start of next season.
If it takes 3 youngsters in one deal and 3 in another, he'll do it. Remember how he went out and got Glen Anderson then Gilmour. Then when Glenny wasn't giving an elite effort anymore, he went out and got Andreychuk.
Having an elite duo IMO is necessary in any team rebuilding. He should be able to get more then enough picks/prospects back from other players to lessen the blow to our prospect pool.
PLEASE KEEP TLUSTY, STRALMAN, KULEMIN AND POGGE!!!!!
Then why would you talk about the '5 1st round picks for Stralman,' when you know that it is highly unlikey any team would do it. Please, maybe you can follow your own logic one day?
And don't you think Pittsburg would be willing to take the 10 first round picks from a team desperate to win "now"?
You just described my point to you perfectly, "but odds are there isn't a team willing to give up near that much for him, so therefor, he is for the most part untouchable....."
I am the thread starter, so I know what the thread is about. No need to tell me what should I do, since I am in an arguement with a poster "WITHIN" the discussion topic.
I don't understand what you are arguing with me about.
Edit: I just realized you aren't "lovetheleafs" who was the first person I replied to, that's why I was mixed up.
Everyone and everything else is fair game, although it'd have to be a sweetheart deal to give up Toskala, Kaberle, Stralman, Tlusty, Kulemin and Pogge.
