Speculation: New Numbers

[CraigsList]

Why? Because it was the number of a player who, while under contract, held out on the team and wouldn't play because he wanted more money?

Honour... Heh.

Ehh... What Gilmour did was worse.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Ehh... What Gilmour did was worse.

Why?

It was the exact same scenario, except he showed up to play and asked to be traded. Just because the return on that trade sucked, doesn't make that his fault.

 

[Anglesmith]

If we want a really tight knit group we need to give them even lower numbers.

I am thinking -11, -28, -34. Now those are the numbers of players who are all about 'team' first.

Yeah, but do we really want to listen to the whining of other teams when Brodie selects -66 and Johnny takes -99

Not close enough. Everyone should have numbers between 0 and 0.35. That'll bond them right up.

Thanks for the lulz, guys. I agree with Calculon, I think it's the magnitude of the number that is most important. Fractions are more desirable than negative numbers.