...
Yeah thats not how this works. Teams dont make trades so that they can then make another trade. Its failed bernmeister-esque logic.
I see my name being taken in vain. fortunately for you, I am not God, only one who would serve Him.
But I am not surprised given you are one of my most persistent detractors, often critical w/o a worthy basis, who would insist if I said water was wet, you would persist with no it is not.
1. get real
2. logic > if not >>>>>>>>>>>>> irrational bs
You guys keep saying this but Bern’s been great for months now
THANKS!
I am not a bern enthusiast, but can you call ideas failures if they are all so crazy that none will ever happen?
Whether or not they happen is not the proper benchmark. The ? is should they be done b'c it is worthwhile + on paper sufficiently profitable to participants.
Also, over time, I am often if not usually proven right.
For example, we know I pushed for them to sell high on Buch, among other vets.
They did not listen.
Rs wound up selling him w/only a sliver of rfa status remaining, so the return was properly MUCH less.
That might not have been as obvious as when I had several props moving Buch but in hindsight we now see I was correct.
A player drafted 12OA in 2020
on year 3 of an ELC
a player who isn’t a bust
you think a pick in the 20s is what it takes to acquire him?
thrn Florida uses thr pick to acquire a replacement thst costs more in terms of valuable cap space.
this ^
Why involve Florida when the Rangers could just trade thst for a rental.
or they could have just drafted Byfield……
NO, no more effin rentals, OP is wrong there.
Teams love to make trades that then require them to make another trade as a result of the first trade….
People want simple solutions to complex problems, but usually that is wrong.
In reality, you first undertake complicated solutions that actually work, and refine afterwards to smooth edges as much as possible.
While it is often not obvious w/everything on full display at sq1, moves beget follow up moves which beget more moves, usually reacting to earlier decisions.
Hence while the 'require' may not be immediate, it is not accurate to infer that all moves are in a vacuum without any related follow up