HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

Brewer rumored available???

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-02-2004, 08:57 PM
  #76
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
No, but how can more teams trade down than up (which was the question). Obviously, if there is one team trading down, another team has to trade up right?

Just minor semantics...
Yes very minor semantics. So let me clarify. For example, what if Lowe knows team A wants a coveted player and when it comes to that position, Lowe gets on the phone and says. I will take your 18 pick and your 52 pick and you can pick 14. He is now initiating the trade so he has traded down.

It would be the same if team A phoned Lowe and said how we really love player A and we know you are not that high on him. So we will give you our 18 pick and our 52nd pick for the right to select at 14. So in essence team A is trading up.

And this is really what I meant, Lowe may approach team A and say how what will you offer me to the chance to select 14. He is now trading down. In a draft that is there is not a lot of consensus after pick 2, this is as likely a scenario as Lowe trying to trade up.

And everything I have read says that teams lists are all over the map. Meaning for example Vancouver may have a player A rated 10 and a another team may have him rated 27th. So there is a lot of possibilties for either of the scenarios I have mentioned to occur.

But I think my whole point really was that I don't Lowe trades Brewer unless he can get the top two picks and I don't see that happening. I think it is more likely that Lowe "trades down" or another team "trades up" for Lowes pick.


Last edited by hockeyaddict101: 06-02-2004 at 09:08 PM.
hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 05:17 AM
  #77
Meanashell11
Registered User
 
Meanashell11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: connecticut
Posts: 2,082
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
no, he means how is it possible for more teams to trade up then down? The number has to be equal you mathmatical genius, you
they can trade their pick for prospects or players, tech the team trading for the pick is trading up as they would not have had that pick and the pick trader is opting out. So 1 up/ none down.

Meanashell11 is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 09:46 AM
  #78
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
no, he means how is it possible for more teams to trade up then down? The number has to be equal you mathmatical genius, you
actually, the number of teams moving up does not have to equal the number of teams moving down. It is possible for 29 teams to move up and one to move down as long as the number of positions moved up equals the number of positions moved down.

For example, washington trades its 1st pick for the 30th pick. Pittsburgh moves up a spot, chicago trades up, etc Every team can move up a spot except one who falls by the same number of spots that the other teams cumulitavely moved up.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 11:59 AM
  #79
get yer Aivazoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: a little left of centre
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Sakich
actually, the number of teams moving up does not have to equal the number of teams moving down. It is possible for 29 teams to move up and one to move down as long as the number of positions moved up equals the number of positions moved down.

For example, washington trades its 1st pick for the 30th pick. Pittsburgh moves up a spot, chicago trades up, etc Every team can move up a spot except one who falls by the same number of spots that the other teams cumulitavely moved up.
But each of those 29 little trades that move a team up also moves another team down. Takes two to tango!
Unless you suggest one gigantic thirty-way deal instead of thirty small deals to switch position...

.

get yer Aivazoff is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 12:04 PM
  #80
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
Yes very minor semantics.
Hey, don't shoot the messenger, I was just clarifying what his question was... I figured you had meant that more teams would be looking to trade down and get an extra pick as opposed to treams looking to trade up.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 02:38 PM
  #81
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Hey, don't shoot the messenger, I was just clarifying what his question was... I figured you had meant that more teams would be looking to trade down and get an extra pick as opposed to treams looking to trade up.
No problem that is why I clarified. Obviously my post was not as clear as mud.

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.