Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

by Guest Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:11 pm

Vince Carter 81
Elton Brand 78
Nate Robinson 75

for

Al Jefferson 80
Aaron Afflalo 72
Tiago Splitter 63

by **Stillatin144** Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:24 pm

Waiting for the other owner to accept it.

by Riggs144 Sun Dec 05, 2010 11:31 pm

need to post their ratings

by JakeD42 Mon Dec 06, 2010 12:51 am

+19 overall I cant accept this

by **Stillatin144** Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:35 am

JakeD42 wrote:+19 overall I cant accept this

thanx for the heads up Jake, Didn't even notice it when it was first posted since they did not even place the ratings on their players.

Try adjusting the trade guys.

by Guest Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:53 pm

how have you guys been playing since release and not figured out that overall player ratings don't mean jack shit?

by Riggs144 Mon Dec 06, 2010 2:57 pm

thats what we're going by, we tried to do it the other way but people still complained so its this way or nothing really.

by Guest Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:10 pm

"the other way"? doesn't make sense.

the ratings in this game are meaningless, if you want to stop people from trading 90+ rated players for bench players thats fine, but then again a smart owner should stop that himself and isn't that the point? a trade like this upgrades me at 2 starter positions and upgrades my bench front court and all i give up is vince carter.

by **Stillatin144** Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:24 pm

Bula wrote:how have you guys been playing since release and not figured out that overall player ratings don't mean jack shit?

You are correct, a players rating really does not mean jack at this moment on 2k11, however we use their rating as one of the variables to approve a trade.

The difference of 19 points is just too high to accept this trade. You still have the ability to adjust your trade to make it acceptable and try to resubmit it.

Consider the rating system as a type of salary cap within the league that we are using to keep every team competitive against the rest of the league.

good luck on your future negotiations,
Still

by **Stillatin144** Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:29 pm

Bula wrote:"the other way"? doesn't make sense.

the ratings in this game are meaningless, if you want to stop people from trading 90+ rated players for bench players thats fine, but then again a smart owner should stop that himself and isn't that the point? a trade like this upgrades me at 2 starter positions and upgrades my bench front court and all i give up is vince carter.

This is the reason that we have moderators Bula, to make sure that even though there are owners who may not know what they are doing and are willing to trade away star players for scrubs that those trades are not pushed through to keep the integrity of the league in order.

I hope that you can just look through your roster and your fellow general manager's roster and try to work out a trade that will best suit both of you while also keeping the integrity of the league.

Still

by JakeD42 Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:36 pm

We also don't need 2 new owners not saying that you'll do this, I know both of you are very active. But I don't wanna approve this trade and then have you dump your team and then we gotta try in get a new owner to take your team. The fact is that Nate Robinson for Tiago Splitter makes absolutely no sense I would approve Carter and Brand for Jefferson and Afflalo cause since update Afflalo plays like a 79. You can't just dump Robinson cause you don't like him, what if you did Spencer Hawes for Splitter at 66 for a 63?

by Guest Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:37 pm

the first paragraph of your post makes no sense. why would you even have owners who don't know what they're doing in the first place? i cannot stand it when people put rules in place because they think they need to protect them from themselves when people are perfectly capable of making decisions on their own.

by Guest Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:38 pm

because the point of trading is to upgrade what you need not just arbitrarily take some low rated player and throw him on top of a deal because it makes sense to you randomly.

look at my team and roster and what i need and then think about it.

i have 1 bench guy over 6'7" who plays forward why the hell would i trade him for another player exactly like that when the point is to upgrade my size at several positions?

get the picture why player ratings are not even just stupid, they're counter productive.

by **Stillatin144** Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:44 pm

Forum Rule # 10- Instructions by the moderator team are to be followed.
-----------------------------------------------
You have had three moderators stating that the trade will not go through due to the rating of the players being traded, and yet you continue to argue.

Trade is vetoed. Thread is closed.

by Sponsored content

Western Conference		GP	W	L	Gamertag
	Portland Blazers	0	0	0	BadDez
	Denver Nuggets	0	0	0	GoVols817
	Oklahoma City	0	0	0	Skillet94
	Utah Jazz	0	0	0	krayziekid7
	Los Angeles Lakers	0	0	0	STILLATIN144
	Sacramento Kings	0	0	0	L1GhTz 0uT Moe
	Golden State Warriors	0	0	0	madhops
	Dallas Mavericks	0	0	0	????????
	Los Angeles Clippers	0	0	0	Freemiller22
	Pheonix Suns	0	0	0	Wookle
	New Orleans Hornets	0	0	0	Mike Diesel
	San Antonio Spurs	0	0	0	IL VAMPIRO

Eastern Conference		GP	W	L	Gamertag
	Philadelphia 76ers	0	0	0	kingkakka22
	New York Knicks	0	0	0	JOKO78
	Boston Celtics	0	0	0	xNYSTATE0FMINDx
	Toronto Raptors	0	0	0	CB069
	Milwaukee Bucks	0	0	0	DAFRESHKID91
	Cleveland Cavaliers	0	0	0	DEVAST8NG
	Chicago Bulls	0	0	0	friendlyarrows
	Indiana Pacers	0	0	0	????????
	Orlando Magic	0	0	0	Macattackisback
	Washington Wizards	0	0	0	Atown117
	Atlanta Hawks	0	0	0	MRBKLYN51
	Miami Heat	0	0	0	XxCuZiMaSiAnxX

Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)

Re: Hawks/Thunder (Vetoed)