1. First and foremost, we are not required to capitulate to the status quo; other than what is technically doable, we are confined only by our imaginations.
Will you try to change things, with the power that you have, the power of a million new ideas?
Robert Lamm, Chicago
2. In the NFL beyond a swap of entire franchises, there was a precedent of like 11 players for 1 [or a couple, if I remember, Elroy Hirsch]
My prop of 7 is not that lopsided, and were it necessary, could be broken down into multiple smaller transactions.
3. If we are going to be honest about it, if we did erroneously consider your standard, the factually correct approach would be to take into account follow ups which the original deal prompted.
So instead of adding a cap dump to an initial suggestion, that means a separate transaction for that purpose. As that applies here, 2 or 3 smaller deals easily totaling 7 or more players would, I expect to be found w/some research.
4. As to a high end guy arguably among the top at his position, Tkaczuk.
5. If you want to properly dispute my premise for this trade, attack it on grounds that are fair and reasonable, even if you are limited as to how much objectivity you are able to apply. IMO locking up Sanderson for 8 max term is worth sacrificing Shesty, esp since we have Garand. If you don't like Pinto vs what we give up, that's fine have an honest debate there.
But if you continue w/unsubstantiated "word salad" bs, you leave me no choice but to call you out.
