NDL Forum

Cnasty wrote:Cameron and Ruppert would look nice in those snazzy Vancouver unis.

Lmao...NO

cougnix wrote:Bittersweet sim for the Polar Bears. Lose Blanton for 8 months with a rotator cuff and Robert Hart for 3 weeks with a rotator cuff strain. IN THE SAME GAME! But, the Bears go 6-0 on the week with the offense getting going with Lewis, Graham and Brown doing work at the plate. I may be looking for a pitcher, so I'll be scouring the blocks and the wire for guys...

I'd hate to have to see Patton/Hernandez/Morris in the same division but one of them would definitely look nice up in Cannuck land.

Spitters lose their young stud catcher, Jeff Henry, for 3 weeks.

The hitting has been poor even with this great start, going to need the pitching to keep it up with our best hitter out.

The normal bad April for New York would be understandable if it wasn't so bad. This is no bueno.

trendon wrote:The normal bad April for New York would be understandable if it wasn't so bad. This is no bueno.

it has to be tough losing 2 or 3 stud hitters ever year for the last 3 years.

eventually has to slow you down just a bit i'd think

Appears so.

About to go George on this bitch!!!

I just dont have anyone to go George with.

trendon wrote:The normal bad April for New York would be understandable if it wasn't so bad. This is no bueno.

maybe you can try to suck in the new guys who don't know NY in April... you're just the fast kid who gives everyone a head start to make things interesting

Why does it feel like this is the cycle of the league:

1. Marginal teams go "rebuild" and dump all their good players.
2. Those good players go to teams that are on the cusp of winning it all, while the team getting the good players gives up marginal talent.
3. Those teams then can win it all and dump the recently acquired players on marginal teams with no real shot of winning, getting all the "no-shot" team's best prospects back in return.
4. Some other good team comes along, fleeces the marginal team for the good player giving up scrubs (again).

Rinse and repeat.

Seriously, a rebuild is one thing, but dumping players without receiving offers and counter-offers, and trading within your conference and/or division repeatedly...makes no sense.

dakshdar wrote:Why does it feel like this is the cycle of the league:

1. Marginal teams go "rebuild" and dump all their good players.
2. Those good players go to teams that are on the cusp of winning it all, while the team getting the good players gives up marginal talent.
3. Those teams then can win it all and dump the recently acquired players on marginal teams with no real shot of winning, getting all the "no-shot" team's best prospects back in return.
4. Some other good team comes along, fleeces the marginal team for the good player giving up scrubs (again).

Rinse and repeat.

Seriously, a rebuild is one thing, but dumping players without receiving offers and counter-offers, and trading within your conference and/or division repeatedly...makes no sense.

what do you care?

ajalves wrote:

dakshdar wrote:Why does it feel like this is the cycle of the league:

1. Marginal teams go "rebuild" and dump all their good players.
2. Those good players go to teams that are on the cusp of winning it all, while the team getting the good players gives up marginal talent.
3. Those teams then can win it all and dump the recently acquired players on marginal teams with no real shot of winning, getting all the "no-shot" team's best prospects back in return.
4. Some other good team comes along, fleeces the marginal team for the good player giving up scrubs (again).

Rinse and repeat.

Seriously, a rebuild is one thing, but dumping players without receiving offers and counter-offers, and trading within your conference and/or division repeatedly...makes no sense.

what do you care?

Let's see:

It's basically the same as someone drafting a team in fantasy sports and then trading all their good players for junk the second week, nullifying any reason for the rest of the league to attempt to compete.

Very non-sim, makes no sense, and (incredibly) people don't seem to learn from it.

So explain Vancouver for me?

cougnix wrote:So explain Vancouver for me?

I'm not saying every team, but if you follow major trades with Series winning teams, you can see the cycle, and people continue to feed into it.

I suppose it just points to the fact that we can't be fired by management.

There were a couple of player histories I'd read where it went like this:

Team A (a good team) trades away Player 1 for 5 prospects.
Team A trades 2 of those prospects for 4 other prospects.
Team B, who traded for Player 1 trades him for 4 prospects, none as good as they gave up to get Player 1.
Team C, who acquired Player 1, trades him to Team A for 2 middling prospects and cash.

Team A then has 7 good prospects and Player 1, while giving up 4 prospects (generally not as good as the ones they got) and some cash.

From a baseball stand-point, it's mind boggling.

Coug traded his good guys - now he is a contender
Shel- same thing
detroit, south park - did it some too
omaha - did it and won a championship.

its what guys choose to do....you think we should be building through the draft and free agency only?

Don't kill nicks dreams dak, just let it go...

dakshdar wrote:

cougnix wrote:So explain Vancouver for me?

I suppose it just points to the fact that we can't be fired by management.

refer to me as Lord of the South from now on please....

ajalves wrote:

dakshdar wrote:

cougnix wrote:So explain Vancouver for me?

I suppose it just points to the fact that we can't be fired by management.

refer to me as Lord of the South from now on please....

I laughed and it reminded me of the FedEx commercial where the self-employed guy gave himself a promotion but didn't give himself a raise...

ajalves wrote:Coug traded his good guys - now he is a contender
Shel- same thing
detroit, south park - did it some too
omaha - did it and won a championship.

its what guys choose to do....you think we should be building through the draft and free agency only?

In general, the part I don't get is teams without a shot at a title giving up very good prospects for aging players that won't be able to contribute when that team is actually relevant.

dakshdar wrote:

ajalves wrote:Coug traded his good guys - now he is a contender
Shel- same thing
detroit, south park - did it some too
omaha - did it and won a championship.

its what guys choose to do....you think we should be building through the draft and free agency only?

In general, the part I don't get is teams without a shot at a title giving up very good prospects for aging players that won't be able to contribute when that team is actually relevant.

maybe. I'll say from outside perception, you appear to be 180 degrees the other way. have you ever made a trade? Not a knock at all, just a thought

dakshdar wrote:

ajalves wrote:Coug traded his good guys - now he is a contender
Shel- same thing
detroit, south park - did it some too
omaha - did it and won a championship.

its what guys choose to do....you think we should be building through the draft and free agency only?

In general, the part I don't get is teams without a shot at a title giving up very good prospects for aging players that won't be able to contribute when that team is actually relevant.

I don't know that I've seen a lot of this over the last few seasons. I think guys are way smarter when it comes to trades now than they were 6-7 seasons ago.