Not for that price you're probably not

I said other pieces if you could read but the centerpiece will be the 1st which will be around 15th overall

Other pieces could include some of your cruddy prospects to some of your mid range picks.

Instead of attacking, why don't you suggest what those 'other pieces' might be???

I think you meant to reply to the other feller?

No but I should have quoted your first post. The spirit of this section of this site is to offer constructive criticism based on the OP's ACGM. It doesn't happen very often and I wish it would.

So you're telling me, and not the poster of the proposed trade, to make a proposal?
Hrmf.

Also, only "attacked" in response to the "if you could read", but I assume you glazed over that.

Carry on.

In your first post you replied 'Not for that price you're probably not' while clearly ignoring the OP's line 'Other pieces of course' where you could have suggested what those pieces would need to be to make that particular trade.
Then in your second post 'Other pieces could include some of your cruddy prospects to some of your mid range picks' still didn't offer any suggestions. And sure, the OP was in attack mode with his 'if you could read' statement but my point is that if we all just reply with "NO' or "THAT SUCKS" or "YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT", then we're just a breeding ground for arguments rather than a site for constructive criticism and idea advancement.
I'm not saying you HAVE to make a proposal in your rebuttal, but it might have been helpful to the OP.

I ain't reading allat. Good for you, or sorry it happened.

LOL!! I guess I should have expected that from a hockey fan who's profile pic is a Christmas cat!!!

I'm not even sure how to respond to this because I have no idea what this means.

That's Joe's trademark, being negative.

Only to dimwits.
I act in response to how I feel I'm being treated!

yes Joe