Eastside's Hockey Elite Collide

Chicago sends

Claude Giroux (72)
Petr Straka (73)

Columbus sends

Dylan McIlrath (80)
4th round PHI, 2015

BlackHawk Down (Seb) wrote:Chicago sends

Claude Giroux (72)
Petr Straka (73)

Columbus sends

Dylan McIlrath (80)
4th round PHI, 2015

Accepted

I needed D help since Hakanpaa left for New York.


Although Giroux has great offensive skills, I had to give him to get a good d-man along with Straka. With Watson's injury, Giroux would have had more playing time but I think getting better on defense will help. Straka is also a cheap forward with some skills I could have used more but he was essential to the deal. I got better on D while giving 2 very capable forwards who are young and not expensive.

Thanks Kevin for the deal

The committee has already reviewed and discussed this trade; without waiting for Kevin to weigh in (we need more than just "accepted" for all but very minor deals), we have rejected this trade.

Once again, a top-notch shutdown D is being traded for very common--and, therefore, unbalanced--assets. Not to sound like everyone's dad, but GMs, don't be in such a rush to trade such big pieces.

I'm not gonna complain about the trade being rejected, it's your decision I don't mind. The problem is that I just kept receiving PM's since the trade got rejected of people trying to teach me how to manage my team or trying to offer me a package of hockey sticks and pucks for McIlrath. I'm not used to take decisions that quickly but I had what I wanted with that trade since I could have 2 good low salaried forwards and be able to call up my young D who's stuck in the AHL.

I've been playing EHM non-stop since it was released almost 15 years ago and I've been in sim leagues for a while too. Maybe I made a mistake, but I'm not dumb.

Don't take it personally, Kevin, but I think new GMs should have a 1 month trade ban to get a feel of the rosters.

Edmonton throwing Schenn around for a mid range pick makes absolutely no sense.

Penguin wrote:Don't take it personally, Kevin, but I think new GMs should have a 1 month trade ban to get a feel of the rosters.

Edmonton throwing Schenn around for a mid range pick makes absolutely no sense.

Not really necessary to throw this out there. I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't act like I don't know what I'm doing. Thanks for the input.

Come on boys, were in a good groove right now. It was a freak thing having a trio of trades rejected like this.

It's a learning experience for everyone and we all have a better idea of what a players value is.

Positivity!

Tampa Bay GM wrote:Come on boys, were in a good groove right now. It was a freak thing having a trio of trades rejected like this.

It's a learning experience for everyone and we all have a better idea of what a players value is.

Positivity!

I understood Schenns value after researching past trades/looking at previous drafts and made a deal to get my own pick which I place extra value on. If the league doesn't value that, that's fine. Keep it to yourself or in private. I didn't make a stink about it and don't need shitty holier than thou comments to be made publicly on trades that have nothing to do with me. That isn't necessary.

Tampa Bay GM wrote:Come on boys, were in a good groove right now. It was a freak thing having a trio of trades rejected like this.

It's not exactly a freak occurrence - I will say that we have consciously decided to set the bar for trades higher than what it used to be in the past. We think it is more fair to try to have consistent judgments, even it if means rejecting more trades than we used to. However, the process for approving trades - including reworking rejected trades - has not changed, so please keep any discussions of specific trades to PM.

Gms just helping out all of you from one way robbery. Be thankful. They helped me a lot and still do.

It only means you can get more in a trade. point.

Well, i think that there also has to be kind of a consistent line across for accepting/rejecting. Especially when you see actual TC members ( not stating any names at all) offering pretty much crap for high end players.....and amazingly, those trades MIGHT make it thru just because of who is on the TC. Not saying all TC would accept whatever deal it was. But i have seen some outlandish offers and holy shit, would hate to see the backlash if something like those ever ever got accepted. The only thing that kind of bothers me is, when you see one shitty deal go thru, and then the very next trade might be along the same lines, and that one gets accepted.

Just remember that what you think is a shitty deal might look good to some other guys. No one holds the absolute truth and we're doing our best to prevent unfair deals to go through.

Quit that BS, Jimmy boy.

So you're not saying the TC would cheat to gain an advantage for any of its members, but you are saying they would manipulate circumstances in an underhanded way so as to distribute benefits to its constituents.

Commish Bub(NYR) wrote:So you're not saying the TC would cheat to gain an advantage for any of its members, but you are saying they would manipulate circumstances in an underhanded way so as to distribute benefits to its constituents.

Penguin wrote:Don't take it personally, Kevin, but I think new GMs should have a 1 month trade ban to get a feel of the rosters.

Edmonton throwing Schenn around for a mid range pick makes absolutely no sense.

Guys, let's keep the personal opinions about recent deals out of these threads. Not picking on you, Bern. I just don't want repeats of past behaviors from various folk who feel obliged to jump in on trades before decisions have been made.

As Dan said, trade reviews are an imperfect thing, and not everyone agrees with every decision. I know from talking with Adam over the years that there are trades he wishes he had rejected, and ones he wishes he had let through. We do the best we can and we move on. We always encourage GMs to re-work their deals, and we never tell anyone they can't trade this or that player.

This clearly has gone too far, I learned the lesson and I won't do that mistake (Which I don't usually do) again.

Singin the BLUES wrote:Well, i think that there also has to be kind of a consistent line across for accepting/rejecting. Especially when you see actual TC members ( not stating any names at all) offering pretty much crap for high end players.....and amazingly, those trades MIGHT make it thru just because of who is on the TC. Not saying all TC would accept whatever deal it was. But i have seen some outlandish offers and holy shit, would hate to see the backlash if something like those ever ever got accepted. The only thing that kind of bothers me is, when you see one shitty deal go thru, and then the very next trade might be along the same lines, and that one gets accepted.

I don't remember ever getting a PM from you with concerns about a trade decision. Since you don't seem to care enough to share your thoughts via PM like you're supposed to, I kindly invite you to shut the fuck up.

This discussion has little to do with this trade anymore so it will not continue, and any further issues should be addressed via PM.