Would you trade Pettersson or Hughes along with a top 10 pick for the #1 overall?

[tas]

2 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

I can't say yes to trade ideas that aren't even remotely possible.

 

If being "that guy" means being someone to call out ridiculous ideas, I'm fine with that. Much better then being someone who uses personal attacks against others, so yes I will congratulate myself for that.

"that guy" is the guy who thinks he's too smart to either suspend his disbelief for a second and participate or just keep his worthless 2 cents to himself and find another thread that actually meets his lofty quality standards. 

[King Heffy]

48 minutes ago, nergish said:

I think Bedard's separating factor (other than his lethal shot) is his hockey IQ.

He reminds me a ton of Brayden Point, in that the puck just seems to find him no matter what, due to his on-ice intelligence and spatial awareness.

 

So, he's kind of like a Caufield/Point/Yzerman hybrid. Good luck putting a ceiling on that! Franchise player, to be certain.

But I'm just not sure how much better that is than a prime Elias Pettersson.

 

He'll be as good as McDiver in his prime without the character issues.  Best player I've seen since Mario.

[Master Mind]

3 minutes ago, tas said:

"that guy" is the guy who thinks he's too smart to either suspend his disbelief for a second and participate or just keep his worthless 2 cents to himself and find another thread that actually meets his lofty quality standards. 

You've taken an incredibly defensive position for even the slightest criticism of your idea. It's a bad look, especially when the proposal would never happen.

[24K PureCool]

I would but no team is trading Bedard. Heck we could give them Petey, Hughes and a top 5 pick and they won't do it. 

[tas]

Just now, Master Mind said:

You've taken an incredibly defensive position for even the slightest criticism of your idea. It's a bad look, especially when the proposal would never happen.

it's a bad look that even now you can't grasp that how realistic the proposal is is completely irrelevant to the topic. 

 

it's like having a conversation with a tree stump. 

[Master Mind]

3 minutes ago, tas said:

it's a bad look that even now you can't grasp that how realistic the proposal is is completely irrelevant to the topic. 

 

it's like having a conversation with a tree stump. 

When you feel the need to say this, and put several unrealistic conditions, then it's clear that it's a poor idea.

[nuckin_futz]

What I have yet to read in this thread is what Bedard would mean to the franchise's value. From an ownership perspective if you wouldn't make that deal you have rocks in your head. Bedard is an absolute marketing dream come true.

 

Look at what McDavid has meant to the value of the Oilers franchise. In 2015 the year they drafted McDavid the franchise was valued at $445 million. Today they are valued at $1.275 Billion. They have nearly tripled in value. In that same time the Canucks have gained a mere 44% in value.

 

The Oilers are now the 7th most valuable franchise in the NHL. The Canucks are 13th. The Oilers' closest comparable is Calgary. Calgary is currently the 21st most valuable franchise (mind you there are some arena woes going on there). Since 2015 the Flames have doubled in value. All that is despite the fact that McDavid has yet to lead the team anywhere and despite him having the charisma of a bowl of Corn Flakes.

 

If you want to know what Bedard means to a franchise's value consider this. The Regina Pats did not trade Bedard at the WHL deadline despite the fact that they are merely a .500 team and despite the absolute larcenous haul some deadline deals brought in the WHL. Why didn't they trade him? It's because the value to the franchise to simply have Bedard as an alum forever is worth far more than the potential players and picks would be.

 

Now extrapolate that to an NHL team in a Canadian market and I think you all can figure it out. The only reason an NHL owner would not make that trade is either they are straight up foolish or they are allergic to money. And there's not a single one of them who are. Especially not our beloved Aquaman.

Edited January 15, 2023 by nuckin_futz

[tas]

Just now, Master Mind said:

When you feel the need to say this, and put several unrealistic conditions, then it's clear that it's a poor idea.

its not the point.

 

if someone asks you what you'd do if you win the lottery is your answer "I don't buy lottery tickets"?

 

if someone asks you what you think a cloud looks like is your answer "a cloud"?

 

jesus christ, either participate in the thread or leave. I don't care which, just choose. if your brain lacks the maneuverability to operate outside the ridgid constructs of your bleak reality, then maybe this isn't the thread for you. they don't all have to be. you don't just have to diarrhea your opinion everywhere, you can find an appropriate receptacle. 

[Mr. Quacks]

26 minutes ago, tas said:

all you've done is demonstrate that you have no clue what my purpose was for the thought experiment. you should have simply answered yes, you would make either trade. period. end of story. but instead you had to be "that guy" on the internet. congrats. 

did you ever think your "experiment" was not well thought out and poorly executed? You have posed such an unrealistic and one-sided trade that you yourself are advocating others to say yes. Hypothetically, if someone offered you a billion dollars for a pencil, you'd say yes - yet the discussion is meaningless. Any person would respond, "yes, but that's never gonna happen." Don't be snarky with people who don't subscribe the the ridiculous hypothetical you proposed. 

[tas]

1 minute ago, Mr. Quacks said:

did you ever think your "experiment" was not well thought out and poorly executed? You have posed such an unrealistic and one-sided trade that you yourself are advocating others to say yes. Hypothetically, if someone offered you a billion dollars for a pencil, you'd say yes - yet the discussion is meaningless. Any person would respond, "yes, but that's never gonna happen." Don't be snarky with people who don't subscribe the the ridiculous hypothetical you proposed. 

like I've told him, just because you don't understand my purpose doesn't make it invalid. I've gained the precise insights i was looking for with my precisely calibrated question. it's about what I'm curious about, not what you think is realistic. 

[Master Mind]

2 minutes ago, tas said:

its not the point.

 

if someone asks you what you'd do if you win the lottery is your answer "I don't buy lottery tickets"?

 

if someone asks you what you think a cloud looks like is your answer "a cloud"?

 

jesus christ, either participate in the thread or leave. I don't care which, just choose. if your brain lacks the maneuverability to operate outside the ridgid constructs of your bleak reality, then maybe this isn't the thread for you. they don't all have to be. you don't just have to diarrhea your opinion everywhere, you can find an appropriate receptacle. 

There are better odds of me winning the lottery than having one of these trades happen, that's how unrealistic it is. Might as well make the same proposals for McDavid or Makar -- they won't happen.

 

If there was even a shred of a possibility of this happening, I could indulge you. Since you're asking people for their thoughts on your impossible scenario, I answered the way I do whenever presented with ridiculous ideas. If you don't like that, that's fine you don't have to. But name calling for not participating in your fantasy? That's crossing a line and I expect an apology.

[Mr. Quacks]

Just now, tas said:

like I've told him, just because you don't understand my purpose doesn't make it invalid. I've gained the precise insights i was looking for with my precisely calibrated question. it's about what I'm curious about, not what you think is realistic. 

I understand the purpose of this, i am saying it's poorly executed. Any experiment that forces other to respond one way is not a good one. I don't know what else to tell you. 

[tas]

2 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

There are better odds of me winning the lottery than having one of these trades happen, that's how unrealistic it is. Might as well make the same proposals for McDavid or Makar -- they won't happen.

 

If there was even a shred of a possibility of this happening, I could indulge you. Since you're asking people for their thoughts on your impossible scenario, I answered the way I do whenever presented with ridiculous ideas. If you don't like that, that's fine you don't have to. But name calling for not participating in your fantasy? That's crossing a line and I expect an apology.

great, so go do it then. this wasn't about you. it's about me. I decide what is relevant. 

 

edit: and by all means, start holding your breath on that apology. 

Edited January 15, 2023 by tas

[tas]

1 minute ago, Mr. Quacks said:

I understand the purpose of this, i am saying it's poorly executed. Any experiment that forces other to respond one way is not a good one. I don't know what else to tell you. 

you DON'T understand the purpose, clearly. there's more to it than the yes or no. it wasn't poorly executed, it was PERFECTLY executed for my desired purposes. 

[tas]

people insisting over and over again that they understand what 2 + 2 equals, yet coming up with 5 each and every time ...

 

it's exhausting. 

[Master Mind]

1 minute ago, tas said:

great, so go do it then. this wasn't about you. it's about me. I decide what is relevant. 

 

What a narcissistic approach.

 

1 minute ago, tas said:

you DON'T understand the purpose, clearly. there's more to it than the yes or no. it wasn't poorly executed, it was PERFECTLY executed for my desired purposes. 

 

I love how you assume that you know what I and others know. There is no way for you to know and you shouldn't make such preposterous assumptions.

[tas]

@-DLC-I'm sorry for perpetuating this this long. I'm sick of it. can you do me a favour and prune all of the nonsense out of here? I just want my very narrowly-purposed topic to stick to my dictated parameters as much as possible. it was by design. 

[nuckin_futz]

[Mr. Quacks]

Just now, tas said:

@-DLC-I'm sorry for perpetuating this this long. I'm sick of it. can you do me a favour and prune all of the nonsense out of here? I just want my very narrowly-purposed topic to stick to my dictated parameters as much as possible. it was by design. 

You've continually violated the following guideline:

• Posting abrasive negative judgement on the quality of posts (eg. 'Your opinion is moronic, ignorant, stupid)

[-DLC-]

I have to step away for a few hours....we'll shut this down (for now) and someone will review the thread (I will be back by gametime if it hasn't been done).