ATD Trade Review Thread

[Leafs Forever]

I just prefer to look at it balancing out our last deal

[Sturminator]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

This one needs further review

That's a ridiculous deal. I think Bugg is trolling us.

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Originally Posted by arrbez

Howcome? Are there no conditional trades? I'll admit, I didn't really read all the rules before this started

But yeah, it's the smallest of small trades pretty much. Just 8 spots being moved in later rounds.

Oh it was just a throwaway comment - you guys are cool.

Equal margins between picks usually heavily favors the team getting the earlier jump. But it's obvious that 4 pick differences aren't going to break the draft, so you guys are totally cool. If those margins were 50 picks each we might have an issue

[Sturminator]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

If those margins were 50 picks each we might have an issue

Oh, I think -30 -17 +32 +19 would suffice...

[papershoes]

Originally Posted by arrbez

Hey guys,

Small conditional trade to announce. Papershoes and I are making a couple small swaps, based on my guy not getting taken with the next pick.

So IF my player is there (papershoes knows who it is), the trade is as such:

To arrbez: 123, 134, 198, 262

To papershoes: 127, 130, 194, 258


If not, trade is nixed.

confirmed on the conditional basis

[arrbez]

Originally Posted by papershoes

confirmed on the conditional basis

As we just discovered, the guy I wanted was already gone. I just missed him on the list.

So trade cancelled for now. FALSE ALARM, PEOPLE!

And I will go hang my head in shame .

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Originally Posted by arrbez

As we just discovered, the guy I wanted was already gone. I just missed him on the list.

So trade cancelled for now. FALSE ALARM, PEOPLE!

And I will go hang my head in shame .

LOL, who was it? Stewart?

[arrbez]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

LOL, who was it? Stewart?

Let's just say I couldn't believe Delvecchio was falling this far

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Originally Posted by Sturminator

Oh, I think -30 -17 +32 +19 would suffice...

Another on the clock trade too.

I realize Bugg probably had his dreams shattered when he lost out on Kasatonov, but that's no reason to throw away two top 150 picks.

[Leafs Forever]

Oh my I didn't even realize the pick was on the clock right now

But the way these talks are going I'm hesitant. But I don't intend to chew up so much time like last time.

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Originally Posted by Leafs Forever

Oh my I didn't even realize the pick was on the clock right now

But the way these talks are going I'm hesitant. But I don't intend to chew up so much time like last time.

Yup, Bugg made an on the clock trade. Or at least tried to. I can't see this one being allowed to stand.

[hfboardsuser]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

Yup, Bugg made an on the clock trade. Or at least tried to. I can't see this one being allowed to stand.

We're allowed to, I thought? One-hour clock deduction?

[Leafs Forever]

Modified:

To Toronto: 122, 136, 200, 298
To Kimberley: 152, 153, 168, 252

[arrbez]

Originally Posted by Leafs Forever

Modified:

To Toronto: 122, 136, 200, 298
To Kimberley: 152, 153, 168, 252

If I math'd right:

+30, +17, -32, -46

OR

1.5 rounds now for 2.5 rounds later

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It's still lopsided in LF's favor but at least it doesn't look like you're flat out trolling us anymore

[gmm]

Originally Posted by God Made Me

Pittsburgh Keystones gets 216, 233, and 297

1893 Montreal AAA gets 193, 256, and 320

When you guys have time, this trade has not been posted in the draft thread yet. I know it's 100 picks away, I just don't want it to fall through the cracks.

[Stoneberg]

So is the second deal still pending review or is it passable?

[Leafs Forever]

Presuming Mr. Bugg doesn't have to confirm this upgrade for him, I'll make the pick in a bit, with a couple more inputs on the deal requested to gauge.

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Originally Posted by Stoneberg

So is the second deal still pending review or is it passable?

I haven't signed off on it yet, and even if I did, we need more than one member to sign off on trades that have been flagged

[Sturminator]

That is still an awful deal. I think this is Bugg's passive-aggressive way of telling us that he is butthurt.

[seventieslord]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

It's still lopsided in LF's favor but at least it doesn't look like you're flat out trolling us anymore

agree.

[Dreakmur]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

It's still lopsided in LF's favor but at least it doesn't look like you're flat out trolling us anymore

Agreed

[TheDevilMadeMe]

This is kind of my fault in writing the rules. Should have kept the -1 hour deduction for both GMs involved in an OTC trade that we had towards the end of last round. We'd have 2 GMs at -4 already

[Jafar]

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe

This is kind of my fault in writing the rules. Should have kept the -1 hour deduction for both GMs involved in an OTC trade that we had towards the end of last round. We'd have 2 GMs at -4 already

yeah man , we all hate you.

But seriously , at least we'll learn from our mistake , just like the law , you have to write every single possibility and rule them because people will always abuse any hole in the rules.

You can't count on ''social conscience''.

[Sturminator]

I honestly think this is intentional provocation on Bugg's part. He is trying to test the boundaries of what is allowable. If we allow Bugg to get obviously ripped off in trade, he will throw that back in the faces of any future trade committee.

I really wish people would just police themselves, but if men were angels, we wouldn't...something, something, something. My vote is to veto.