|
|
Post by senatorsgm on Jun 30, 2004 16:21:26 GMT -5
He shouldnt just get a player that is the best since mayb he wouldnt want that one. He should be skipped and be an example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Preds on Jun 30, 2004 16:32:42 GMT -5
Me and Wally have been talking about which player is assigned to San Jose. I think its obvious that we arent going to skip his pick, punishment isnt needed for a bad GM. Getting kicked out is the punishment. THe team wont be punished. ANyways, me and Wally were wondering why Olesz isnt considered here? We need to have some criteria as to what list we are going to use in the future if this situation comes up. I think this should be in the rules, that a GM is kicked out if he doesnt draft and the top ranked player based on either CSB ISS or the actual draft (depending on what we decide) is takin with that teams pick. Phoenix?
|
|
|
|
Post by redwingsgm on Jun 30, 2004 17:11:10 GMT -5
Well Wally, it's been more than 24 hours so feel free to choose whoever you want (as long as it's not Olesz or Wheeler, since those are the two we're considering giving the Sharkies).
|
|
|
|
Post by Preds on Jun 30, 2004 17:17:51 GMT -5
lol yeah i suppose if he wasnt gonna take one of them it would be fine, but we cant continue the draft like that. Lets solidify what the rule is and apply it, this has really slowed stuff down. Whats our source? The nhl draft as our gauge or CSB or ISS?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago and Montreal on Jun 30, 2004 18:02:32 GMT -5
I'm goin wait til Mike has his pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by PralinePHX on Jun 30, 2004 19:01:09 GMT -5
Sorry, I was out at the movies...
The Sharks will be given Blake Wheeler as he is the highest taken player still on the board. This was the criteria we used last year for the inactive/vacant teams and will continue to be the criteria used in the future. I'll get it added to the rules, I'm actually surprised it didn't survive the first rule re-write.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wild Sabre GM on Jul 1, 2004 1:18:25 GMT -5
So if I understand all of this correctly, the Sharks got Blake Wheeler but need a new GM?? I see the point of not hurting the organization and just replacing the GM.
|
|
|
|
Post by thrashers on Jul 1, 2004 1:26:59 GMT -5
OK, well now that Wheeler has been picked, who was the first team planning on taking him? I'm just wondering how far he would have fallen. If he were still available, I doubt I would have taken him with either of my picks (25th and 27th).
|
|
|
|
Post by Wild Sabre GM on Jul 1, 2004 1:28:40 GMT -5
Don't think I would have at 28 either.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyersGM on Jul 1, 2004 2:07:13 GMT -5
i would've given him a shot at 29
|
|
|
|
Post by Panthers and Jets on Jul 1, 2004 2:23:58 GMT -5
If he slipped to 42, I definitly wouldve snagged him. Im sure Gretz knows a little something about hockey players
|
|
|
|
Post by thrashers on Jul 1, 2004 3:41:43 GMT -5
so anyone with a pick before 29...would you have taken wheeler?
|
|
|
|
Post by PralinePHX on Jul 1, 2004 5:37:54 GMT -5
so anyone with a pick before 29...would you have taken wheeler? I would not have at 19th. |
|
|
|
Post by senatorsgm on Jul 1, 2004 7:06:11 GMT -5
at 30th i would have not 21st tho
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago and Montreal on Jul 1, 2004 10:46:56 GMT -5
I woulda picked him at 14.
|
|
