| Date | 2007-08-05 10:41 |
| Message | You're right I did miss count Eppsters (I guess I didn't count Hasek because he's completely off the age radar), but not Bruins - doesn't really matter at this point . . . |
| Date | 2007-08-05 07:34 |
| Message | Ummm... I was under the impression that Rob just miscounted the protection list for the Eppsters. They have actually protected 12 guys and Radulov on top of that, for thirteen total, and I think Rob thought that they protected 11 guys and Radulov for only 12. Anyways, I'll be making my proposed selections early and then if any of you want to negotiate for a different form of expansion compensation I'll be listening. |
| Date | 2007-08-05 07:11 |
| Message | Actually Goon, I'm GM of 4 (maybe 5) teams (you forgot to include your own (and Dan's too); remember the Jillson trade? i.e. Straka and Redden - that was a very nice favour - but I guess I didn't pay you off enough to keep your mouth shut). As for the ruling by the Expansion committee - I am happy to go along with it. |
| Date | 2007-08-05 06:52 |
| Message | The Sunday deadline is not for changes to be made but to check if I made any mistakes in posting the rosters. The deadline for rosters was on Fri. |
| Date | 2007-08-05 06:31 |
| Message | All I know is it is clear that Blazer is the GM of 3 teams in this league and he was unable to keep track of all the roster spots and is now scrambling. Sad. |
| Date | 2007-08-05 05:50 |
| Message | Eppsters have the correct number protected. 12 roster and 1 prospect. I'm with GM Brown, as long as The Bruins catch it before the deadline has expired. |
| Date | 2007-08-05 05:06 |
| Message | What are you talking about Goon? You and Dan have 15 players protected - (12 regular spots - 3 prospect spots). GM Terror asked if there needed to be ammendments to these lists prior to the August 5th 3 pm (pst) deadline for ammendments. I merely pointed out oversights by 2 GMs. Radulov is a prospect - Epp protected 11 players and 1 prospect. Neufeld protected 12 players and no prospects. If it's binding it's binding I don't really care - GM Peters asked for input and I gave it. I don't think that we should automatically protect those players for the GMs in question, however, if it was an honest mistake they should appeal it with GM Peters (before today at 3 pm) like he offered. |
| Date | 2007-08-04 06:27 |
| Message | I would like to commend GM Terror for how he has handled this expansion process thus far. As for Blazers complaints, why is he fighting for other GM's interests? I personally have found this entire process very clear, especially the protection number of 12. 12 man protection lists. No where have I ever read that you can bump up that number to 13 if you dont protect 3 prospects. There is no way I would support Chris or Shane being able to protect 1 more player than everyone else. |
| Date | 2007-08-04 11:42 |
| Message | Ladd was not on The Bruins protection list which I consider binding. Chris protected the max of 12 players plus Radulov. Where does this extra spot come from? |
| Date | 2007-08-04 11:21 |
| Message | Eppsters should also use one of their 3 prospect pick protections to include Radulov and hence be able to protect one more player. |