Buds Board Keepers League

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON

The Devil wroteCOLONI don't know if it's even possible to overpay for Sid..

Jonathan Toews and Corey Perry comes awfully close

lol, agreed

MSP4LYFE wroteCOLON

The Devil wroteCOLONI don't know if it's even possible to overpay for Sid..

Jonathan Toews and Corey Perry comes awfully close

lol lowball offer.

Toews and Perry is nice right now, probably for the next 3-5... but 5+ years from now it'll be a joke. There is no such thing as too much for Sid, fantasy wise sure...real NHL GM, nothing is too much.

facey wroteCOLONToews and Perry is nice right now, probably for the next 3-5... but 5+ years from now it'll be a joke. There is no such thing as too much for Sid, fantasy wise sure...real NHL GM, nothing is too much.

pretty much. when I asked Kareem what he wanted, I was prepared to move two of my stars straight up. Kareem said he wanted RNH for sure so we went this route. But Kareem could have easily had i.e. Brad Richards + Patrick Sharp + Beaulieu if he wanted lol.

shooker wroteCOLON

kyuss wroteCOLONyep, a concussed player.

Surprised no one mentioned the key part of the deal for Kareem

You do realize Crosby has been cleared to play and has zero remaining symptoms right? Bad concussion yes but career over hardly.

i never said career over, and as a hockey fan i can only wish Sid will stay healthy forever.

However, thinking his concussion didn't somehow affect Kareem decision seems really weird to me.

The rationale behind this trade dates back to one simple question: How do I extract the maximum value from Sidney Crosby?

To understand the "how", we must first understand the "why"...

Sidney Crosby commands upwards of eight million dollars in cap annually. My philosophy places emphasis on the success of the team, over the individual, one or more expensive assets acts as a constraint on that goal.

That answers the "why", the "how" proved more challenging to answer...

When dealing Crosby, there are three alternative options:

1) Deal for multiple proven assets

2) Deal for proven asset and unproven assets (with potential)

3) Deal for multiple unproven assets with potential

Options 1) & 2) had significant drawbacks. Option 1) was next to impossible to accomplish, few are willing to deal multiple elite assets for any one player, and those that are lack multiple elite assets. It is even more difficult to do so without taking on a large cap hit. Option 2) seemed like an unnecessary risk; why deal Sidney Crosby for a risk? The answer to this question provided the inspiration for option 3).

You deal Sidney Crosby for unproven assets because it is the only way to return multiple: inexpensive and potentially impactful assets, and if you are going to take a risk, why not maximize that risk, and consequently it's potential? The final question remaining is the "who", and that presented itself in the form of Shiv following his draft exploits.

Some may criticize this deal on the premise that 2011 lacks a proven star quantity, and I don't disagree, however a strong top end does not return the same quantity, and as a wise man once remarked, "Quantity is a quality all in itself".

SuperMario wroteCOLON

facey wroteCOLONToews and Perry is nice right now, probably for the next 3-5... but 5+ years from now it'll be a joke. There is no such thing as too much for Sid, fantasy wise sure...real NHL GM, nothing is too much.

pretty much. when I asked Kareem what he wanted, I was prepared to move two of my stars straight up. Kareem said he wanted RNH for sure so we went this route. But Kareem could have easily had i.e. Brad Richards + Patrick Sharp + Beaulieu if he wanted lol.

Brad Richards wasn't even on my list of interests, his age, expected income and weak peripheries made him an after thought in this type of transaction. I liked Sharp, as you know from the initial offer, but it became clear early that if I wanted him I needed to sacrifice one of: RNH/Couturier as well as Joffrey Lupul, and that didn't make sense to me.

kyuss wroteCOLONYou do realize Crosby has been cleared to play and has zero remaining symptoms right? Bad concussion yes but career over hardly.

i never said career over, and as a hockey fan i can only wish Sid will stay healthy forever.

However, thinking his concussion didn't somehow affect Kareem decision seems really weird to me.[/quote]

It was not a significant consideration, and certainly not the motivation behind this deal, but it was indeed a consideration.

2011 draft will be looked at as a very good one in a few years I say.

Lots of people sleeping on it because of the hype surrounding 2012.

I wouldn't even be concerned about so called about star quality.

KapG wroteCOLON2011 draft will be looked at as a very good one in a few years I say.

Just wanted to make it non-editable

facey wroteCOLON

KapG wroteCOLON2011 draft will be looked at as a very good one in a few years I say.

Just wanted to make it non-editable

If I'm wrong I'll be cool with that .

facey wroteCOLON

KapG wroteCOLON2011 draft will be looked at as a very good one in a few years I say.

Just wanted to make it non-editable

I agree with him. Considering more than one scout has said this draft could have the depth teh 2003 one had, just without the high end top picks.

I have believed in this draft since day 1. I didn't go pick crazy for no reason. There was a discrepancy between what I thought the market value of the picks were and what the rest of the league did.

RNH will be a star next to hall. Couturier will be the best forward drafted this year. And Larsson will be one of the best young d-men in the league. Hubs is a bit of a wild card in the sense that he will be great just not sure how great. Landeskog is probably the one out of the top 5 that imo does not have a ceiling comparative to top 5s in better draft years but he has the + of being one of the most nhl ready top 5s.

Shep wroteCOLON

facey wroteCOLON

KapG wroteCOLON2011 draft will be looked at as a very good one in a few years I say.

Just wanted to make it non-editable

I agree with him. Considering more than one scout has said this draft could have the depth teh 2003 one had, just without the high end top picks.

Confusing this year with 2003 is laughable. Is the scout calling the high end picks the entire first round?

Every warning sign of a questionable draft has surfaced. However I guess at this stage it's all opinion.

facey wroteCOLON

Shep wroteCOLON

facey wroteCOLON

KapG wroteCOLON2011 draft will be looked at as a very good one in a few years I say.

Just wanted to make it non-editable

I agree with him. Considering more than one scout has said this draft could have the depth teh 2003 one had, just without the high end top picks.

Confusing this year with 2003 is laughable. Is the scout calling the high end picks the entire first round?

Every warning sign of a questionable draft has surfaced. However I guess at this stage it's all opinion.

Yeah, looking at a draft that has not even happened yet compared to one with 8 years in development is laughable.

I'm not saying we're going to get 25 NHL regulars from the 1st round, I just think it's hilarious that people expect like 4 NHLers out of this draft.

Read anything scouts are saying, and they believe this is becoming one of the most underrated drafts in recent history due to 1 year ago lack-of-hype.

The scout was probably referring to the NHL potential of the prospects.. not necessarily the star power of 2003.

The Devil wroteCOLONThe scout was probably referring to the NHL potential of the prospects.. not necessarily the star power of 2003.

I'm not referring to star power either.

Shep wroteCOLON

The Devil wroteCOLONThe scout was probably referring to the NHL potential of the prospects.. not necessarily the star power of 2003.

I'm not referring to star power either.

That's what I said

Is Corey Perry star power? Zach Parise? Ryan Getzlaf?

You guys are talking about the best year EVER, the late 1st is star-filled, and expecting any draft year to compare to 2003 lacks logic, yet alone a draft year that has been questionable for the past 2+ years.