Some of these guys are underrated just because they aren't star names...i didnt expect to sign so many guys in UFA therefore i have too many players...PM with offers
Quick isn't the problem, at least in game he isn't. He played like a monster against ANA, but I couldn't get many scoring chances and I just beat the commish 2-0. Anyways I think im going to pull Brown off the block because ive played well with him, but everyone else on my block is still available including Richards.
After losing to the last place LA Kings the Tampa Bay Lightning havent gotten desperate bring depth into the lineup immediately. Unfortunately the player that was #1 on the Bolts list was the #1 Center on his team with not much depth. But luckily after ironing out some kinks, and a bit of an overpayment, the Tampa Bay Lightning have a trade to announce.
get:
A. Vermette
L. Korpikoski
for get:
TB 2013 1st rd pick
K. Aulie
C. Conacher
T. Pyatt.
Taking vermette away from phx without returning a true #1 C puts PHX in a tight situation, so I had to make up for it. In return I get a highly underrated(Everyone in TBC should know) center with blazing speed and hands, not to mention physical ability. And also get a underrated winger with just as much speed as vermette to add the the lightnings already blazing speed.
Did I give up a lot, yes, but not having Lecavier for 50 games would put me in a even worse of a spot. And when lecavier comes back I have 2 lightning fast lines.
Last edited by slightlystewpid420: 11-30-2012 at 06:22 PM.
looking to trade a depth defenceman:
Cole (76, 4*) - Would cost more than the other guys to get
Woywitka (76)
Huskins (75)
Chorney (74)
Fairchild (71)
Looking for a 3rd/4th line forward, preferably C but not too picky. My draft picks except 1st rounder are available to try and get a deal completed! PM me some offers.
After losing to the last place LA Kings the Tampa Bay Lightning havent gotten desperate bring depth into the lineup immediately. Unfortunately the player that was #1 on the Bolts list was the #1 Center on his team with not much depth. But luckily after ironing out some kinks, and a bit of an overpayment, the Tampa Bay Lightning have a trade to announce.
get:
A. Vermette
L. Korpikoski
for get:
TB 2013 1st rd pick
K. Aulie
C. Conacher
T. Pyatt.
Taking vermette away from phx without returning a true #1 C puts PHX in a tight situation, so I had to make up for it. In return I get a highly underrated(Everyone in TBC should know) center with blazing speed and hands, not to mention physical ability. And also get a underrated winger with just as much speed as vermette to add the the lightnings already blazing speed.
Did I give up a lot, yes, but not having Lecavier for 50 games would put me in a even worse of a spot.
That's not really an overpayment. (Not that I think one is necessary)
Korpikosky is at least as useful as Pyatt, no?
So its a 1st, a D prospect, and a forward prospect, for a top-line C.
That's about right, if you look at real-world values.
In this game, I think that's a comfortable win for TB, unless that pick ends up being top-10 or so.
After losing to the last place LA Kings the Tampa Bay Lightning havent gotten desperate bring depth into the lineup immediately. Unfortunately the player that was #1 on the Bolts list was the #1 Center on his team with not much depth. But luckily after ironing out some kinks, and a bit of an overpayment, the Tampa Bay Lightning have a trade to announce.
get:
A. Vermette
L. Korpikoski
for get:
TB 2013 1st rd pick
K. Aulie
C. Conacher
T. Pyatt.
Taking vermette away from phx without returning a true #1 C puts PHX in a tight situation, so I had to make up for it. In return I get a highly underrated(Everyone in TBC should know) center with blazing speed and hands, not to mention physical ability. And also get a underrated winger with just as much speed as vermette to add the the lightnings already blazing speed.
Did I give up a lot, yes, but not having Lecavier for 50 games would put me in a even worse of a spot.
That's not really an overpayment. (Not that I think one is necessary)
Korpikosky is at least as useful as Pyatt, no?
So its a 1st, a D prospect, and a forward prospect, for a top-line C.
That's about right, if you look at real-world values.
In this game, I think that's a comfortable win for TB, unless that pick ends up being top-10 or so.
As a jackets fan i never thought we should have traded away vermette tbh. He had a 50%+ f/o percentage. One of the fastest in the league, and hes got a suprising amount of stregnth. And hes not even going on my first he'll stay on my second. He might see some time on the wing when lecavier comes back, guess it just depends.
Can we agree to drop the "franchise" standard please? Just leave the option in place for a commissioner veto of any questionable deal--preferable with input from some unbiased GMs.
There aren't nearly as many "franchise" players are some of the discussions here would suggest. Some teams have them, some teams think they might. Only a handful really have more than one, and they aren't likely to move anyway.
As a jackets fan i never thought we should have traded away vermette tbh. He had a 50%+ f/o percentage. One of the fastest in the league, and hes got a suprising amount of stregnth. And hes not even going on my first he'll stay on my second. He might see some time on the wing when lecavier comes back, guess it just depends.
You take some risk, for sure, particularly with that pick, but Vermette is very good in this game.
You'll be in an interesting situation next year. That's a ton of salary to tie up at 1-2-3 C. Maybe Vinny or Vermette to 1LW?
Can we agree to drop the "franchise" standard please? Just leave the option in place for a commissioner veto of any questionable deal--preferable with input from some unbiased GMs.
There aren't nearly as many "franchise" players are some of the discussions here would suggest. Some teams have them, some teams think they might. Only a handful really have more than one, and they aren't likely to move anyway.
Just my $.02.
I mean its really up to my descretion who and who isnt a franchise players. I'll treat it on a trade-by-trade basis.
After losing to the last place LA Kings the Tampa Bay Lightning havent gotten desperate bring depth into the lineup immediately. Unfortunately the player that was #1 on the Bolts list was the #1 Center on his team with not much depth. But luckily after ironing out some kinks, and a bit of an overpayment, the Tampa Bay Lightning have a trade to announce.
get:
A. Vermette
L. Korpikoski
for get:
TB 2013 1st rd pick
K. Aulie
C. Conacher
T. Pyatt.
Taking vermette away from phx without returning a true #1 C puts PHX in a tight situation, so I had to make up for it. In return I get a highly underrated(Everyone in TBC should know) center with blazing speed and hands, not to mention physical ability. And also get a underrated winger with just as much speed as vermette to add the the lightnings already blazing speed.
Did I give up a lot, yes, but not having Lecavier for 50 games would put me in a even worse of a spot. And when lecavier comes back I have 2 lightning fast lines.
I mean its really up to my descretion who and who isnt a franchise players. I'll treat it on a trade-by-trade basis.
...ok?
I guess what I'm saying is that there needs to be clarity for the negotiations. I'm not really making any major moves right now, but a few others are, and no one knows whats going to happen when the first "big" name gets moved.
What's required for a franchise player? 50 percent more value than the bar? Double? Is the value-bar even the right metric?
Saying that "franchise" players requires an "overpayment" seems to be to obscure more than it clarifies. That's all I'm saying. No one knows who counts as a franchise player, or what constitutes an over-payment.
Over in Pheonix, we thank Antoine Vermette for his good service and wish him and the Tampa Bay Lightning the best of luck. This move helps solidify the future of the Pheonix Coyotes upfront with the addition of two key forward prospects as well as a first round draft pick in the upcoming draft.
I've realised that I struggle to score in this league, so this year is more of a learning and development year. You can't win if you cant score!
I guess what I'm saying is that there needs to be clarity for the negotiations. I'm not really making any major moves right now, but a few others are, and no one knows whats going to happen when the first "big" name gets moved.
What's required for a franchise player? 50 percent more value than the bar? Double? Is the value-bar even the right metric?
Saying that "franchise" players requires an "overpayment" seems to be to obscure more than it clarifies. That's all I'm saying. No one knows who counts as a franchise player, or what constitutes an over-payment.
Franchise players are pretty easy to spot in my eyes. Really anybody you say a team the first person that really comes to mind. TB would be stamkos st louis and lecavier. CHI would be Kane and Toews Pitt would be malkin, crosby, fleury. But not every team has a franchise player. If you have any questions while trying to work a trade just message me and ill get back to you.
Franchise players are pretty easy to spot in my eyes. Really anybody you say a team the first person that really comes to mind. TB would be stamkos st louis and lecavier. CHI would be Kane and Toews Pitt would be malkin, crosby, fleury. But not every team has a franchise player. If you have any questions while trying to work a trade just message me and ill get back to you.
Some of those guys have been subject to trade rumors for years (Vinny, Kane) or are old enough where they can't really be considered franchise cornerstones anymore, no?
Age, contract status, positional depth all have to be factors, honestly.
To me, the list is much shorter than you're implying.
Anaheim: None. (Getzlaf and Perry are UFA)
Boston: Chara (and only for this year, maybe 2, because of age).
Buffalo: Miller
Calgary: None
Carolina: E. Staal I guess?
Chicago: Toews, Keith (Kane has been subject to rumors, true or not, and is stuck behind Toews).
Colorado: None.
Columbus: None
Dallas: Benn.
Detroit: Datsyuk / Zetterberg (I'm not even sure which?)
Edmonton: You tell me.
Florida: None
LA: Doughty, Quick I guess. The three Cs sort of cancel each other out.
Minnesota: Parise and / or Suter (but they just signed?)
Montreal: Price
Nashville: Weber
New Jersey: Kovalchuk
Islanders: Tavares
Rangers: Lundqvist (maybe Gaborik?)
Ottawa: Karlsson
Phladelphia: Giroux
Phoenix: None.
Pittsburgh: Crosby, Malkin
San Jose: ?
St. Louis: Pietrangelo
Tampa: Stamkos
Toronto: Kessel?
Vancouver: Sedins?
Washington: Ovechkin, maybe Backstrom
There's a whole generation of "budding" superstars--e.g., Hall, Eberle, and RNH, just on Edmonton alone, but because of the nature of online progression, I'm not sure you can call them "franchise" players right now. There's also guys like Seguin, E. Kane, T. Myers, P. K. Subban, and many others who are just a notch below because of OV and age.
With a few exceptions, you're talking about young or prime-aged 87+ talent (with a few older guys in the 90s). That's really a "franchise" asset, isn't it. It isn't a question of who has been the best / most identifiable player in the past 10 years; its which player, if you were forced to choose just one off that team, would you want going forward?
GMs should be able to move aging stars (Thornton, Iginla) if they are interested in rebuilding. Unlike real life, we don't have to sell tickets.
EDIT: Apparently I had more to say on the matter than I thought.
Don't take this the wrong way. I love how you are running the league. It just seems to me that this is the last loose thread that needs to be tied up.
Last edited by Jack de la Hoya: 11-30-2012 at 07:47 PM.
I'd say that Quick and Kopitar are my other franchise players, the difference between Kopitar and Richards is his age and the fact that he still has potential.
I'd say that Quick and Kopitar are my other franchise players, the difference between Kopitar and Richards is his age and the fact that he still has potential.
Quick was an obvious oversight on my part. (I'm sure there are / will be others).
In game terms, you are right about Kopitar vs. Richards, but with three guys at that position over 86, it seems tough to call him untouchable (again, in game terms)
Quick was an obvious oversight on my part. (I'm sure there are / will be others).
In game terms, you are right about Kopitar vs. Richards, but with three guys at that position over 86, it seems tough to call him untouchable (again, in game terms)
I personally would consider players with franchise potential as "franchise players" too. The players that either already are the face of the franchise or are well on their way.
Examples: Larsson on NJ, Landeskog on Colorado. They may not be clear "franchise" players like Stamkos, but it's clear they will be (in real life).
Edit: Though I agree they are few and far between, and not every team has to have one.
looking for an upgrade in net. Either long term or temporary. Willing to part with draft picks and certain prospects.
get:
get:
looking to trade a depth defenceman:
