Thread: Speculation: 2012-2013 Roster
View Single Post
06-20-2012, 12:47 PM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by 35NW8ING View Post
Winning the cup with Giroux is a completley diffrent subject. That's your topic, not mine. It has nothing to do with this discussion. Talk about that in another thread with someone else.
It's got everything to do with the discussion. As you said since they haven't won a Cup with Carle on a top pairing, until they do. It's a fact that they can't. Why is the standard different for another player?

Originally Posted by 35NW8ING View Post

Those are your words not mine.

Yes they are your words. It's in black and white right here.

"Until it happens, it remains a fact."

"It is a fact because they didn't win a cup with that first pairing. "

Originally Posted by 35NW8ING View Post

Not at all.

For the fourth time, you need to let go of the word easy. Bottom line, I think its easy
to replace a 2nd pairing guy like Carle, you think it isn't easy. A difference of semantics.

If they need your assets bad enough, and the trade helps weaknesses on both teams, a deal gets done.

If Wayne Gretzky can be traded, anyone can for the right price. I guess you knew all along that the next Bobby Clarke (Richards) would be traded.

I've never stated anything about a degree of difficulty in winning the cup. Another wide turn by you, introducing another irrelevant topic to the discussion about replacing Carle.

Because that's usually how trades work, give up something to get something. If you go the UFA route, it costs money, and if you try the RFA route it costs money and picks. There is always a cost associated with acquiring a player.

Yes, pick up the phone, kick some tires, and try to make a deal. That's how trade talks usually begin. Same for UFA's and RFA's. Call the agent, discuss parameters, and submit your offer.

If you are a GM trying to improve up front, you may have to part with one of your top 4 defensemen. Definitely a possible scenario if the other team is looking for a defenseman.

Conversely, like the Flyers, if you are looking to obtain a top 4 defenseman, you may have to part with something up front if the other team is looking for forwards.
No it's not semantics. The entire debate is about whether it is easy to replace a player like Carle. Easy is the key to the entire debate. Now your moving away from that and trying to debate that it is possible to replace a player like Carle. And your doing that because it's obvious how wrong you are. Every statement you've made here is giving an example of how it's possible. None of it fits the debate.

Take the statement that if Gretzky can be traded anyone can. That is not the debate. But I'm making wide turns! LOL

The debate is whether it is EASY to replace a top 4 defenseman, not whether or not it is possible.

And the fact is that your statement of it is easy to replace a player like Carle, is simply wrong. It is not easy to replace any top 4 quality defenseman. It is certainly possible, but it is not easy.

VanSciver is offline