View Single Post
Old
09-25-2012, 05:06 PM
  #187
IButtersI
Registered User
 
IButtersI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 484
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUBdrewgANS View Post
Ducks were better off with the Rangers Ryan deal.

IMO I think that deal should've still went through.. as it was already "confirmed" it was as if that trade was already made, and it would've been if the game was out then. Just because a new GM took over shouldn't negate the trade.. If a GM gets fired in real life, the new GM can't reverse a trade because he didn't agree with the last GM's decision making.






Lets analyze this deal with just age for a minute

Vrbata 31
Torres 30
Runblad 22
Michalek 29
Doan 35
Gormley 20

for

Fowler 20
Etem 20
Ryan 25
Sbisa 22

You traded 4 players total, all young pieces all with good or decent potential

for

4 aging players who have reached their peak or close to it
and 2 young players with good potential


Now lets look at the Rangers deal:

Ryan 25

for

Girardi 28
Bickel 25
Kreider 21

Here you get a good defensemen in Girardi, a depth defensemen in Bickel, and a young player with crazy potential in Kreider..


I may not have made the Ranger trade when it was presented, it would depend on where I was at with that team, if I made that trade. But there is no way I would make the trade that was accepted with PHX, not even if it was just Ryan, but Sbisa too?
The Ranger trade is garbage. Bobby Ryan will get moved for a package similar to what Rick Nash got. Girardi is decent but the other 2 players are non existant in this game.

Anaheim really does not have depth. I want as many players on my team who are in the 80s as possible. Also gives me much more flexibility with my roster having more NHL ready players if a deal that I like comes up.

If I was the commish of a league, I wouldn't even accept the Girardi trade. If thats all it took to get Ryan, he would have been traded by now.

IButtersI is offline   Reply With Quote