The issue is not so much the veto of this particular trade but that it's just one man making the call. One point of view. As I said, a trade should only be vetoed if it's clear collusion or dumping, not based on what value one puts on given Vetoes should not be used to prevent trades people don't like or to protect a manager from himself.visualdarkness wrote:I agree 110% with the decision to veto that trade, what the heck was that kind of trade? We cant let a manager that might not even be here completely ruin a team, that is simply the backside of having keepers.
I tried a far more balanced trade but that got rejected instead so I dont now what is up with WSB?
WSB traded Tomas Plekanec, Mon C to SURA
WSB traded Vladimir Tarasenko, StL RW to SURA
WSB traded Wayne Simmonds, Phi LW to SURA
SURA traded Jonathan Toews, Chi C to WSB
SURA traded Joe Thornton, SJ C to WSB
SURA traded Taylor Hall, Edm LW to WSB
Visualdarkness, you say that you agree110% with the decision to veto that trade, complain about the trade, and also claim that you came up with more balanced trade.
However, from where I'm standing, your proposal ain't that much different/better than mine.
1. You want Plekanec back, who can be considered as keeper. Whether you keep him or not is another question. He provides decent stats.
2. You offer Towes, who provides basically soft stats and is good for about 60pts. Not Exactly super star.
3. Thorton is an aging star, albeit a productive one. Again, only soft stats.
4. Taylor Hall is attractive part of the deal.
Meanwhile, I gave him a blue chip prospect in Larkin, 20/20 in his rookie year. Voracek that had 55 in a down year with some injuries but his a part of very dynamic team, which has a very potent PP. Palat, alongside Kucherov and Johnson is the future of the Lighting.
Even if one consider your offer better, it's not by a land slide.
But my point is this, imagine your offer gets accepted instead and gets vetoed because one person thought it's one sided. I don't think that's right. People value players differently. People should be allowed to make the trades they deem favourable.
If it's not collusion or dumping, I say let it be. There is no veto in the NHL when one GM does worse than the other or vice versa. One should not be able to simply overturn moves that a given team makes because he doesn't like them.
The very lease we can do is give each team the power to veto a trade and then this trade goes to vote, if the majority of owner are ok with the trade it gets finalized.
