Caboose Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Yeah, looking back on that its pretty well the worst trade we've seen. If the Suter trade was vetoed this should be too, easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dion Phaneuf Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Tyler Graovac is available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BananaMash Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Well, at least when Swee is done there will be another team for Ari to fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Lol not at all...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UMB Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Yeah, looking back on that its pretty well the worst trade we've seen. If the Suter trade was vetoed this should be too, easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baercheese Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Look at his stats. He had a good year for me. Im comparing them in STHS not IRL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F.Underwood Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 True enough, I mean even though Gally was giving up insane players he was getting back an elite player.....this Goligoski trade, swee is getting nothing for that elite player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UMB Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 wouldnt call goligoski an elite player, though, swee did get nothing in return for him. Not sure how this one got by the review board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 wouldnt call goligoski an elite player, though, swee did get nothing in return for him. Not sure how this one got by the review board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 The goligoski trade needs to be veto'd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidney Crosby. Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 True enough, I mean even though Gally was giving up insane players he was getting back an elite player.....this Goligoski trade, swee is getting nothing for that elite player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baercheese Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 High potentials but shjtty everything else Plus, don't the re-rates consider real-life performances as well? I doubt either of them will get a bigger re-rate than Goligoski himself Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidney Crosby. Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 High potentials but shjtty everything else Plus, don't the re-rates consider real-life performances as well? I doubt either of them will get a bigger re-rate than Goligoski himself Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I think it's unfair to say "swee did get nothing in return". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimon Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Quoting doesn't work properly on my phone, but here goes: Goligoski is a serviceable top-pairing defenceman despite what his ratings suggest. Stick him with a good partner and ice time and he thrive just like in Dallas. His defensive may not be something to boast about but I bet he would play a #2 and big PP role on at least half the teams in this league. Not to mention that given the state of your defence prior to this trade, you are in fact getting a top pairing player for not much going the other way. Barring a miracle season, Sundstrom will be hard pressed to make it to the big show and Kunhackl is likely to top out as a 3rd liner (optimally). 75 and 70 potential are nothing to write home about given that those two players had poor seasons and ice time, limiting their re-rated growth. Moreover, the 2nd rounders aren't exactly deal-makers either. Given the talent that you have and theaaddition of Goligoski, the Pens will likely finish in the top-20 next season, not exactly a prime draft position in the second round. I don't have a huge vested interest now that I'm not managing Dallas, but it's a shame to see my efforts of taking that team to the post-season on the backs of players like Goligoski (and to a lesser extent Ott) go to waste. Goligoski should and could have fetched a much higher price. Guess people know why I may request NTCs for core players as agent to prevent lopsided deals like this. Makes GMs think harder about the deals that they make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caboose Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I like how sweefish has yet to come and justify this move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otis Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Looking to make some move's, looking to upgrade on D especially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UMB Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I may not be positive, but I think that "Elite Player" Nathan MacKinnon is talking about is Ryan Suter in his old vetoed trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 I agree that the Suter deal is not in the same league, the Suter deal was very lopsided however I feel this Goligoski one is too...sure he's gettign 1st rounders but they were from a while ago and it's not that fair IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UMB Posted December 19, 2012 Share Posted December 19, 2012 Not even, sundstrom was a late 2nd rounder, Kuhnhackl a 4th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.