Comments for Top 100 Roto Players - November 2012 at http://hockey.dobbersports.com , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments http://hockey.dobbersports.com Sun, 19 May 2013 10:53:11 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/46-gates-imbeau/5063-top-100-roto-players-november-2012#comment-23311 I'll be happy to elaborate on both comments this evening. Stay tuned. - GMGates Wed, 21 Nov 2012 09:02:01 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/46-gates-imbeau/5063-top-100-roto-players-november-2012#comment-23299 @toughmudder I think the point was not so much that you would only make the trade if you get the same return but that rashly trading Luongo away at a low point doesn't necessarily make sense. He was once worth Quick and there is still a potential that he returns to that. Then again I could be reading it completely wrong. Either way it isn't written clearly. - canada Wed, 21 Nov 2012 00:40:54 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/46-gates-imbeau/5063-top-100-roto-players-november-2012#comment-23297 So much of the advice given in this guide makes no sense whatsoever. You used the following example: X trades away Jon Quick for Luongo. At the time, the two goalies were of similar calibre, but since the trade Quick has become worth significantly more. You then say that you shouldn't trade Luongo away without considering that he "used to be" Quick. And as such, you shouldn't trade Luongo away unless he would get you the same return as Quick would. I quote: "While trading a starting goalie for forward depth is fine - depending on the situation - GM Y must have realized at the trade table that the initial asset (Luongo) was once Quick. Would the deal above still have happened if it was Quick involved rather than Luongo? Probably not." This is a ridiculous way of thinking. Better advice would be: -Consider sunk costs. In other words, if you make a bad trade, accept it...and move on. If someone traded Karlsson for Filatov 5 years ago, should the owner of Filatov only accept an offer that would get the same return as Karlsson? Of course not, it is completely unrealistic and will only result in your team not making the moves that would actually benefit it going forward. - toughmudder Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:01:58 +0100