korab rules Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Yea.. but it would be nice if he did... my brain can't even begin to quantify how wrong that picture is. That's because your brain only operates in analog. You are so yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Yea.. but it would be nice if he did... my brain can't even begin to quantify how wrong that picture is. Someone here made a good point. It's not fair that a male dominated board all gang up and act like a bunch of adolecents because a social girl posts a few pictures of herself. Where is the beefcake for the girls to oogle and make comments on? Well, I figured it was well enough time that I give the girls what they wanted....and post a photo of what may or may not be from a 2007 photoshoot I had done. Either way. We're all even now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Regier didn't have to trade 4 prospects to get Regehr though did he. I'm not saying he's done everything right and I'm not attached at the hip to him, but he's doing what he can to make the team better now and for the foreseable future (not that I don't want something done now. Just not blowing up the team to win a championship, then suck for 5 years.). Okay, I am not sure I would go that far and still think Darcy is incompetent. That being said look at the source Burke... BA HA HA HA HA HA HA :w00t: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Someone here made a good point. It's not fair that a male dominated board all gang up and act like a bunch of adolecents because a social girl posts a few pictures of herself. Where is the beefcake for the girls to oogle and make comments on? Well, I figured it was well enough time that I give the girls what they wanted....and post a photo of what may or may not be from a 2007 photoshoot I had done. Either way. We're all even now. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Someone here made a good point. It's not fair that a male dominated board all gang up and act like a bunch of adolecents because a social girl posts a few pictures of herself. Where is the beefcake for the girls to oogle and make comments on? Well, I figured it was well enough time that I give the girls what they wanted....and post a photo of what may or may not be from a 2007 photoshoot I had done. Either way. We're all even now. Didn't you and Stan Lane win the NWA tag team championships? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 That's because your brain only operates in analog. You are so yesterday. But I'm still using Monster cables to get my thoughts across! Someone here made a good point. It's not fair that a male dominated board all gang up and act like a bunch of adolecents because a social girl posts a few pictures of herself. Where is the beefcake for the girls to oogle and make comments on? Well, I figured it was well enough time that I give the girls what they wanted....and post a photo of what may or may not be from a 2007 photoshoot I had done. Either way. We're all even now. Yes. Even. If it's come to that.. then we should be prepared for what comes next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Someone here made a good point. It's not fair that a male dominated board all gang up and act like a bunch of adolecents because a social girl posts a few pictures of herself. Where is the beefcake for the girls to oogle and make comments on? Well, I figured it was well enough time that I give the girls what they wanted....and post a photo of what may or may not be from a 2007 photoshoot I had done. Either way. We're all even now. Sometimes, like now, I wish I had the time to hang out on the board more frequently. Just so I don't have to ask "what?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Burke's on Regier Lindy's ridin' Miller Cat and Dogs sleeping together... I'd say the two are opposites. DR overvalues his players and Burke undervalues other teams players. Not a good match for trading. All successful GMs undervalue their opponent's players. You get the best deal that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Well, I think Burke is a bit overrated as a GM. He seems like a good guy, but also a bit of a blowhard and he clearly enjoys media attention. He won in Anaheim after Pronger fell out of the sky and into his lap. He certainly fleeced Calgary on the Phaneuf deal, but I would ascribe that more to incredible incompetence in Calgary than to brilliant dealmaking by Burke. (I would have loved to see the Sabres make a play there but I don't think Calgary shopped him around much and in any case I don't think TG/LQ would've paid the $$ required.) The Kessel deal is a push at best. Having one Neidermayer on the roster when the good one wanted to play with his brother didn't hurt either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 7, 2012 Report Share Posted January 7, 2012 Someone here made a good point. It's not fair that a male dominated board all gang up and act like a bunch of adolecents because a social girl posts a few pictures of herself. Where is the beefcake for the girls to oogle and make comments on? Well, I figured it was well enough time that I give the girls what they wanted....and post a photo of what may or may not be from a 2007 photoshoot I had done. Either way. We're all even now. If that's the case ... what's with the 1977 hairstyle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabres Fan in NS Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. Catching up on my reading of the board ... Just a little in your mouth ... I'm surprised you didn't power puke the four corners of your office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 All successful GMs undervalue their opponent's players. You get the best deal that way. Well, not exactly. All successful GMs are good at valuing both their own and their opponents' players. They begin negotiations on a trade by offering what they know is less than equal value, but selling it as equal, and expect their counterpart to do the same. However, this last step is the one that Darcy may not do: a successful GM should be willing to negotiation down to a fair point if the net result makes his team better. That is, while the trade value of the players/picks by both sides may be similar, each team benefits from the net change (for example, a rebuilding team trades vets with value for picks/prospects with equal values.) A GM who only makes trades when he fleeces the other team will miss out on a lot of chances to improve his team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted January 8, 2012 Report Share Posted January 8, 2012 I'd like to see some of the less bombastic blowhard media darling type G.M.s give their honest opinion of Brian Burke. Now that would be entertaining. You'd most likely hear he tries to bully his way through deals and that he looses it when he doesn't get his way and that he also negotiates through the media to try and get what he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChimp Posted January 9, 2012 Report Share Posted January 9, 2012 Well, not exactly. All successful GMs are good at valuing both their own and their opponents' players. They begin negotiations on a trade by offering what they know is less than equal value, but selling it as equal, and expect their counterpart to do the same. However, this last step is the one that Darcy may not do: a successful GM should be willing to negotiation down to a fair point if the net result makes his team better. That is, while the trade value of the players/picks by both sides may be similar, each team benefits from the net change (for example, a rebuilding team trades vets with value for picks/prospects with equal values.) A GM who only makes trades when he fleeces the other team will miss out on a lot of chances to improve his team. But if the other GM is as good as the one you are talking about, they won't get fleeced, because they, too, will have the same tendencies. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.