Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

Jae Crowder

Zyme wrote:Jae Crowder

He is too valuable to cut, sorry

Say what now? A 4 mil expiring contract that didn't play a minute last year? A career .418 shooter? We have a significant difference what too valuable to cut means.

Zyme wrote:Say what now? A 4 mil expiring contract that didn't play a minute last year? A career .418 shooter? We have a significant difference what too valuable to cut means.

My definition of valuable: watch how many GM's will put in a claim for him.

Granted you are loaded at SF but Crowder is better than D. Jackson and your inseason MLE signings.

You could argue he would be 6th best on your team

Oregon Ownage wrote:

Zyme wrote:Say what now? A 4 mil expiring contract that didn't play a minute last year? A career .418 shooter? We have a significant difference what too valuable to cut means.

My definition of valuable: watch how many GM's will put in a claim for him.

Granted you are loaded at SF but Crowder is better than D. Jackson and your inseason MLE signings.

You could argue he would be 6th best on your team

My only concern here is to be consistent. You let the Cav's cut Petro who is a much better player than Crowder and also Ezeli who he signed in place of Petro. I'm not voting one way or the other, just saying both should be allowed, or neither should be.

Oregon Ownage wrote:

Zyme wrote:Say what now? A 4 mil expiring contract that didn't play a minute last year? A career .418 shooter? We have a significant difference what too valuable to cut means.

My definition of valuable: watch how many GM's will put in a claim for him.

Granted you are loaded at SF but Crowder is better than D. Jackson and your inseason MLE signings.

You could argue he would be 6th best on your team

I will abide with the ruling but disagree strongly

pudgejeff wrote:

Oregon Ownage wrote:

Zyme wrote:Say what now? A 4 mil expiring contract that didn't play a minute last year? A career .418 shooter? We have a significant difference what too valuable to cut means.

My definition of valuable: watch how many GM's will put in a claim for him.

Granted you are loaded at SF but Crowder is better than D. Jackson and your inseason MLE signings.

You could argue he would be 6th best on your team

My only concern here is to be consistent. You let the Cav's cut Petro who is a much better player than Crowder and also Ezeli who he signed in place of Petro. I'm not voting one way or the other, just saying both should be allowed, or neither should be.

I understand everyone values players differently and thats what makes this difficult.

Clearly, you cant cut anyone or can you? That would solve the issue but I dont want teams (specifically tanking teams, why would a contending team cut good players?) from having the ability to cut all players or we just have Wild Wild West where you can cut whoever

If you feel a waivr claim would be best then allow players to do this an have a waiver claim ending after the next sim

Zyme wrote:If you feel a waivr claim would be best then allow players to do this an have a waiver claim ending after the next sim

I have always liked a waiver claim(24 hrs or 1 sim) but shouldnt worst record get the claim instead of random?

Oregon Ownage wrote:

Zyme wrote:If you feel a waivr claim would be best then allow players to do this an have a waiver claim ending after the next sim

I have always liked a waiver claim(24 hrs or 1 sim) but shouldnt worst record get the claim instead of random?

Correct worst team to claim gets him. I was expecting if any waiver were it to be occur would be held until after sim 1

Oregon Ownage wrote:

pudgejeff wrote:

Oregon Ownage wrote:

Zyme wrote:Say what now? A 4 mil expiring contract that didn't play a minute last year? A career .418 shooter? We have a significant difference what too valuable to cut means.

My definition of valuable: watch how many GM's will put in a claim for him.

Granted you are loaded at SF but Crowder is better than D. Jackson and your inseason MLE signings.

You could argue he would be 6th best on your team

My only concern here is to be consistent. You let the Cav's cut Petro who is a much better player than Crowder and also Ezeli who he signed in place of Petro. I'm not voting one way or the other, just saying both should be allowed, or neither should be.

I understand everyone values players differently and thats what makes this difficult.

Clearly, you cant cut anyone or can you? That would solve the issue but I dont want teams (specifically tanking teams, why would a contending team cut good players?) from having the ability to cut all players or we just have Wild Wild West where you can cut whoever

It very much has always been you have to trade your better players, not cut them. But the deciding the value is tough. I almost feel like value equals if someone does claim them, then they should have to complete a trade for them. I mean Crowder was signed in FA this year to that deal, and then you are just letting it go to the team with the worst record? If there are multiple waiver claims then it ends up who makes the trade offer. If their are no waiver claims he can't be signed the rest of the year maybe? Just trying to think of a way that makes it fair to all the teams that either wanted him in FA or would want him now.

This is my thought on how a waiver process would work:

Player X is cut. The cut thread now acts as his waiver claim thread. If someone wants to claim him, they give a claim notice and would then inherent the salary.

If left unclaimed, business as usual.

pudgejeff wrote: Just trying to think of a way that makes it fair to all the teams that either wanted him in FA or would want him now.

There wont be a fair way IMO. If someone wanted a player in FA then offer more. FA is random too. If you want to trade for them, you will see someone was put on waivers, you can then try and work a trade before the claim process ends.

Zyme wrote:Jae Crowder

Done