Veto

[NorthAmericaPride]

I\'m just wondering what you guys think of this trade and if its total shit.

Team A gets Sakic and AULD and 6th round pick
TEAM B gets Rolston and ERAT and 2nd round pick
in a very important end contract draft year.

Team A trades ERat WHO HE got in the first place from TEAM B for his 3rd pick. And Rolston was Team A\'s best player last year besides Brodeur and Giguerre...reason for the trade I suppose.

But the picks are just ridiculous.
Sakic has bad back and could retire as soon as mid season.......the way things are going. Auld is a career backup goalie who Team B picked off the waiver wire a week ago.

[andrewklassen]

Knowing the scoring system would help, but I think this might be really close.

At his age I don\'t peg Sakic for much more than 70 and Erat could hit that in a good year.

In NJ I don\'t Rolston ever sees the happy side of 60. I don\'t know how your G scoring works, but this looks like a gamble by someone who thinks Auld might steal the starting role away from Gerber...stranger things have happened.

Sakic is likely the best player involved in the deal so that side gives the higher draft pick.

Knowing your scoring could change my opinion and you alluded to contract status that I don\'t profess to understand. On the surface this seems really close to me.

Edit...I see your karma going down...just know it\'s not me.

Why the fuss?

[Kotentie]

I don\'t like this trade. Its really one sided but unless you are pretty sure that the players are working together to cheat, you\'ve got to allow it. I know unbalanced trades are hurt the rest of the teams in the league but its part of the game. If Florida makes a terrible trade with, say Vancouver, it has to be allowed even though it will screw Florida. The only way the league would stop it was if they knew they were working together to cheat the rest of the league.

[NorthAmericaPride]

They aren\'t cheating. Team B is just the master of ripping people off. regular goalie categories nothing special.

[Zorro]

I wouldn\'t think this be a deal worth a VETO. The team acquiring Sakic and Auld are giving up a good player in Erat and a great PP goal producer in Rolston. They are also giving up a 2nd rounder. I don\'t mind the deal.
Z..

[hockeyislife]

It\'s not as bad as it looks.

Sakic Auld and a 6th for Rolston Erat and a 2nd

If Auld runs with the number 1 spot in Ottawa for a while, there\'s nothing wrong with this. If he falls flat on his face next week, then it looks awful.

By the same token what if Sakic can\'t come back from the back injury till January; or Erat breakes his leg and is on the shelf til the playoffs.

Part of the thing about trading is speculating what players will do. What we can\'t control is how the players will do. Injuries, trades, slumps, marriage problems all affect what happens.

Bottom line, on face value, this isn\'t a trade worth vetoing.

Just my $.02

[Atomic Wedgy]

Sakic will have the most points come the end of the year. I really dont see a problem with this trade. Certainly nothing to merit discussing a veto.

[smoothfun]

Again , without knowing the scoring format i do\'nt see how this would even be considered for a veto.In most pools goalies are very valuable and with the injuries to some , as well as the bad play of some others Auld may turn out to be the best player in this deal.He could become the clear #1 in Ottawa with a little luck ; I for one would\'nt mind having the #1 goalie for the Sens!.

[NorthAmericaPride]

I agree not worthy of VETo, not sure why I wrote that. I\'m surprised with the turn out of responses!!! sometimes I write important messages and no responses. This time I write an assclown comment and millions show up. what gives? (no don\'t answer)

[hockeyguru_87]

Lopsided yes. Veto worthy no.

[hockeyguru_87]

Lopsided yes. Veto worthy no.

[Dr.Smurf]

It IS lopsided, but unless you\'re completely conviced that they\'re conspiring to stack one players team, you gotta let it go. One key part of pools is being a tricksy little hobbit and swindling people into trades that benefit you.

[Seeds of Grapes]

Since when has \"fairness\" been the standard of a veto?

Trades should only ever be vetoed if they are a result of collusion. There is no evidence of collusion. The trade should stand.