Toggle sidebar

Kings claim Brendan Leipsic on waivers from Vancouver

riznat said:
Perhaps SOME teams SHOULD think that WAY. YOU know HOW maybe NOT ALL GMS or PRO Sports TEAMS are CORRECT in their THINKING. I wasnt having any opinion on if we should trade Carter or not, or make big moves after the cup however, to state that because no one would do that then it is a bad idea when so few GMs actually win anything is a really stupid argument IMO.

Our team is horrible this year and has been for quite some time, maybe some GMs should think more like some of the fans on this board? Perhaps selling high on some players in this cap league actually makes some sense?

Also do you think you could tone down the all cap words and saying things like FFS so often? I know you like to think you are very intelligent and have all the answers, are better then everyone etc... but it really hurts your image when you type the way you type. DO YOU THINK THAT ANY ADULT would type THAT WAY??? FFS!!! NO one WOULD!!!!!
Click to expand...

LOL...
LOL...
LOL...
LOL...
LOL...
LOL...

* Seek immediate medical help if you experience LOL lasting longer than 4,000 posts
 
GoldenBearHockey said:
I'd like to think adults wouldn't do half the **** they do, wouldn't you?

Should some GM's think that way? That is an excellent debate, honest answer, I have no idea.

What does it tell the team that just won the championship, if you trade one of the cornerstones of that championship because you don't want to pay them? People make fun of intangibles in sport, but they are real.

Again, you are talking about human beings, not small little computer made people on a screen just for your amusement.

Maybe you are right, maybe GMs should think that way, but I have a feeling that they won't, because they are paid to win, and a year away from winning the championship, trading a cornerstone of that because you don't want to pay him, to me, if I was on that team, I would receive that message as a big **** you, we don't care if you win or not, we aren't paying you, and my response, would be fine, **** you, I'm done sacrificing to win, I will just move on.

What would your attitude be, if at your job, you were crucial, absolutely crucial to landing a multi-million dollar account, and then, two weeks later, they fired you so they wouldn't have to pay you a commission? Or told you, yea, thanks for the account, but **** off we aren't going to give you a raise no matter what you did for us....

Same thing in sports, I would imagine.
Click to expand...

But its not like that... getting traded to another team and keeping the same salary is not the same as getting fired and losing your job. You say it all the time when talking about Willie D, he is here to win games, its not a popularity contest, you reference this type of thought process when defending benching Kovy or playing Nate Thompson on the PP, why is that ok but its not ok for a GM to do what is best for the team and the franchise to sell high on players to continue to be competitive year after year (its not guarantee of course, however if that was the strategy then what is wrong with that?). Why do you think doing something like, trading Carter for a Voynov type replacement in 2016 or 2017 would have been a bad thing to do and a sure fire recipe to be a worse team?

You seem to assume that selling high on good players to replenish the team with other good players is a recipe for disaster, i dont know why though.Where did you get that trading someone like Carter a year or two after the cup win means you are saying **** you im not going to pay you? He already had his contract signed and guaranteed.
 
riznat said:
But its not like that... getting traded to another team and keeping the same salary is not the same as getting fired and losing your job. You say it all the time when talking about Willie D, he is here to win games, its not a popularity contest, you reference this type of thought process when defending benching Kovy or playing Nate Thompson on the PP, why is that ok but its not ok for a GM to do what is best for the team and the franchise to sell high on players to continue to be competitive year after year (its not guarantee of course, however if that was the strategy then what is wrong with that?). Why do you think doing something like, trading Carter for a Voynov type replacement in 2016 or 2017 would have been a bad thing to do and a sure fire recipe to be a worse team?

You seem to assume that selling high on good players to replenish the team with other good players is a recipe for disaster, i dont know why though.Where did you get that trading someone like Carter a year or two after the cup win means you are saying **** you im not going to pay you? He already had his contract signed and guaranteed.
Click to expand...

Follow the the thread, Big King came in and said because Kings17 was advocating that we should trade Kopitar instead of resigning him,

When you get that, try again.

As to your question why trading proven players for picks and prospects isn't normally done, ie, trading Kopitar for 1sts and picks etc and trying to stay competitive,

Samuel Morin, Kerby Rychel, Frederick Gauthier, Emil Porier, Hunter Shinkaruk, Michael McCarron, Morgan Klimchuk, Michael Dal Colle, Haydn Fleury, Sonny Milano, Connor Bleachley,

That's my answer, Edmonton is my answer, Calgary is my answer, Ottawa is my answer, there is NO guarantee that a pick or prospect will pan out, so when you have a proven competitor, like a Kopitar, Quick, Brown, etc you aren't going to trade him for a lottery ticket
 
A partial list of marquee players GMs have refused to trade:

Wayne Gretzky
Mark Messier
Marian Hossa (twice in his prime)
Dany Heatley (twice in his prime)
Erik Karlsson
Taylor Hall

Just in case anyone thought this was a completely new idea, going way back:

Phil Esposito (twice in his prime; one of these the year after he scored 61 goals)
Frank Mahovlich (twice in his prime)
Pat LaFontaine
Marcel Dionne (by Detroit to the Kings the year after he had 47 goals and 121 points)
 
riznat said:
Perhaps SOME teams SHOULD think that WAY. YOU know HOW maybe NOT ALL GMS or PRO Sports TEAMS are CORRECT in their THINKING. I wasnt having any opinion on if we should trade Carter or not, or make big moves after the cup however, to state that because no one would do that then it is a bad idea when so few GMs actually win anything is a really stupid argument IMO.

Our team is horrible this year and has been for quite some time, maybe some GMs should think more like some of the fans on this board? Perhaps selling high on some players in this cap league actually makes some sense?

Also do you think you could tone down the all cap words and saying things like FFS so often? I know you like to think you are very intelligent and have all the answers, are better then everyone etc... but it really hurts your image when you type the way you type. DO YOU THINK THAT ANY ADULT would type THAT WAY??? FFS!!! NO one WOULD!!!!!
Click to expand...

I do think GBH raises a good point that for fans, it's a lot easier to say "trade X away" when things go poorly. It's a lot harder as a GM who, a year or two after winning a cup, to say "these guys don't have what it takes. We need to rebuild." For example, it would be awfully hypocritical of Lombardi to preach the importance of sticking with a plan, only to trade a key player away a season after his performance goes down.

A GM not only has to answer to the current stakeholders, but as GMs don't have an expected lifespan on one team, they also have to be able to defend the move for future employers, too. If the employers think you're trigger happy, they may not want to bring someone in.

Should GMs think the way you suggest? The league would be a lot more interesting. But when a GM's career and livelihood are contingent on making these kinds of decisions which are going to come back to him for years to come (nobody wants to be the next Milbury), you have to respect (if not agree with) the caution they show.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yankeeking and TruKingFan
KINGS17 said:
A partial list of marquee players GMs have refused to trade:

Wayne Gretzky
Mark Messier
Marian Hossa (twice in his prime)
Dany Heatley (twice in his prime)
Erik Karlsson
Taylor Hall

Just in case anyone thought this was a completely new idea, going way back:

Phil Esposito (twice in his prime; one of these the year after he scored 61 goals)
Frank Mahovlich (twice in his prime)
Pat LaFontaine
Marcel Dionne (by Detroit to the Kings the year after he had 47 goals and 121 points)
Click to expand...

Seriously?? You think they were just traded away in their prime, or do you think there was a reason behind that?

Holy hell.....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KINGS17 said:
A partial list of marquee players GMs have refused to trade:

Wayne Gretzky
Mark Messier
Marian Hossa (twice in his prime)
Dany Heatley (twice in his prime)
Erik Karlsson
Taylor Hall

Just in case anyone thought this was a completely new idea, going way back:

Phil Esposito (twice in his prime; one of these the year after he scored 61 goals)
Frank Mahovlich (twice in his prime)
Pat LaFontaine
Marcel Dionne (by Detroit to the Kings the year after he had 47 goals and 121 points)
Click to expand...

These guys couldn’t hold Brandon Leipsic’s jock.
 
What I learned tonight.

Leipsic > Toffoli
Leipsic > Carter

Lepsic $650,000
Toffoli $4,600,000
Carter: $5,272,000

Just wow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fat Elvis
damacles1156 said:
Everyone is excited because a player actually gave some effort all night.
Click to expand...
Gotta give the kid a chance to get acclimated and figure out how things work on this team. He will be dogging it in no time if he follows the lead of our "leaders".
 
He actually looks like he has more skill than 85% of the roster, which is kind of sad in a way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom