SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

jonh514

HuGo is a Boss GM
Member Since
Dec. 4, 2021
Favourite Team
Montreal Canadiens
2nd Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
Forum Posts
7245
Posts per Day
7.9
Forum: Armchair-GM1 hour ago
Thread: So happy together
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CaseyFlyman</b></div><div>Before I fully reply, I do want to say that I appreciate you've been really respectful with your replies. I apologize that I'm coming across as rude, it's entirely due to the fact that this trade, almost identically, is a daily occurrence on here, and it's a little exhausting since is almost a universal no from CBJ fans.

That said...I think the biggest misunderstanding is that <em>there is no market on Laine right now</em>. He's not been made publicly available, there's no indication that Waddell is listening on offers, and he hasn't ever asked out. The trade "rumors" are entirely from other fanbases looking at a struggling player on the outside and speculating that it would be possible to pry him away for cheap, when there's no indicators that that's the situation.

The market demand does dictate the price, but there certainly seems to me more appetite for acquiring teams to add Laine than there is appetite to move him in Columbus. That's why an offer like this doesn't get it done, IMO.

As for generalizations/condescension: I'm on here a lot (that's likely a problem). I've seen a lot of Laine trades since, as a CBJ fan, CBJ ACGMs are primarily what I click on. I can tell you, with relative certainty, that I'm not generalizing for the sake of bashing MTL fans; I'm saying literally 90% of Laine trades are some version of this redundant-quantity-for-high-risk-quality trade, with variations on picks/teams/etc, and every time it turns into CBJ fans saying it doesn't make sense, then getting tuned out by other fanbases saying our player isn't worth it. It's definitely not exclusively MTL fans, but it almost always turns into "we know your team's needs better than you, a fan of the team" which is quite literally condescension by definition. It's not a generalization, it's the majority of the ACGM Laine trade experience.

If Caulfield, an excellent player who's only ever played one full season, were injured for 60+ games next season, and the entirety of MTL-involved ACGMs next offseason were Caulfield for 26OA, a 3rd, a bottom-6 center, and a depth defenseman...I think you'd be similarly fed up. I'm just asking you to consider our perspective.

Anyway, thanks for not being a d***, I'm sorry that I have been. I still think CBJ say no to this specific trade for reasons outlined above, and let's leave it at that?</div></div>

I appreciate the apology. I do make an effort to be nice around here and just exchange ideas, but I must admit I lose my cool too sometimes. I swear it was not my intention to Troll but if it came off that way or if I made things personal and you felt disrespected, I apologize as well.

I hear you on the redundant trades, it does get tedious. I hope I can get you onboard with my next "great trade idea"!
Forum: Armchair-GM8 hours ago
Thread: So happy together
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dopplsan</b></div><div>I think the connection between Player Assistance and moving teams isn’t as direct - when and why players go into it is the epitome of case-by-case. I’d also be very hesitant to make generalizations considering we don’t know exactly why he entered it, and what his situation is.

He probably does get dealt, because he doesn’t fit our timeline, and we’ve got some young guns who could use his roster spot. Outside of some fluke injuries and his NHLPAP stay, he’s actually been quite good.

Maybe he does get moved for Pennie’s on the dollar, but the incentive to make that move now is minimal, unless he comes out of NHLPAP demanding a trade. There’s nothing to lose with seeing if he can come back, rebound, and build-up his value.

Even then - CBJ need to do more roster trimming than adding. Harris and Dvorak don’t do much for us, so the bigger incentive would probably be mover futures, or a single useful piece instead a couple of less-than-useful ones.

That being said - yes. At the end of it, at least we don’t have to deal with PLD’s toxicity. It was a bad trade made under duress at the time.</div></div>

Fair enough. I hear you that you don't like the offer. From most Habs fans perspective, if we are going to offer one of 5OA, Guhle, Reinbacher, Roy - we are going to go after a player with less baggage like Necas, Zegras, even Marner.

Anyway I feel you on the not wanting to sell low. Probably a smart idea to hold him another year, but I doubt Davidson does that. It's much easier for him to "clean house" right away. It's quick like a band-aid and he can blame the other guy.
Forum: Armchair-GM8 hours ago
Thread: So happy together
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CaseyFlyman</b></div><div>I understand all that, but you're still ignoring CBJ's perspective and roster needs for the trade, which is true of every "buy low on Laine" post on here, which are all exceedingly similar.

It boils down to this: we frankly don't care what Montreal, or any acquiring team, needs. What we're giving up is a high-risk, high-reward player that fills a massive need <em><strong>to us</strong></em>. What we'd be getting back is a load of redundant pieces and mediocre draft picks that don't fill any Columbus need. It makes more sense to keep the player and take the risk ourselves, since his trade value is already at nearly the lowest it should go.

If you based a trade around conditional picks that upgrade significantly if he stays healthy (60+ games played?) or performs well (25+ goals scored) to give us insurance against him bouncing back with another team, sure, we'd be a little interested. Or if you sent back a legitimate young player that fills a need, like a top-6 option to replace him (Roy) or a defensive defenseman (Reinbacher), sure, we'd be interested; for Reinbacker, we'd add, obviously.

But no, you (and every MTL fan on here) based a trade around a late first in a weak draft, a 3rd in a weak draft, a bottom-6 center who's redundant to Kuraly, Danforth, Olivier, Texier, Luca Del Bel Belluz, and Voronkov while being more expensive and worse, and an undersized two-way bottom-pair right-shot defenseman who plays suspect defense that is directly redundant to Boqvist, who's already frequently scratched because he's not better than Jiricek, Severson, Gudbranson, or anyone on the left side.

We're not good trade partners. We both need top-end talent. We both have similar weaknesses. We both want to compete in the next 2-3 years. Would you trade Caulfield or Slafkovsky or Suzuki for a bunch of futures and depth options? No, of course not, you've got plenty of that. You need top-6 talent and we do too.

It's not the "well your new GM could decide to trade Laine" that's condescending, it's the fact that you (and many others on here) think we'd move him for a package that does absolutely nothing for our organization and then insist that it's "actually good because he might not bounce back". We know. We've been over it a hundred times.</div></div>

It's not condescending. This website is based on simulating trades and trying to achieve consensus on the exchange of property rights. That's what I feel the asset with his implied risk/reward is worth.

It's fine that you feel differently. But getting huffy about it isn't going to convince me to retract my offer or change my perspective. Perhaps a bidding war comes about and then we'll see, but for now, there is a scarcity of teams who can afford to add 8.7M for 3 years. Demand sets the price in the market, not what you feel he's worth.

The decision you have is simply to accept or not accept the deal. I think you've made your position clear.

When I see fans of other teams offering top 10 picks or premium assets for the player, that may make me change my tune, but you calling me names and making prejudiced comments about all Habs fans is just noise.
Forum: Armchair-GM10 hours ago
Thread: So happy together
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CaseyFlyman</b></div><div>He simply does not, I don't know that any CBJ fan I've seen on here is arguing that. The argument is his current trade value is <em>extremely low</em>; we need top-end talent (much like MTL); we don't have a cap crunch, and there's plenty of space for another year. We're all saying it doesn't make sense to trade him <em>right now</em> when we need a Laine, have a Laine, and would benefit from giving him another chance.

It's entirely possible that a new GM looks at him as expendable, but there's more reasons to keep him than not. It's just not good asset management, or the likeliest outcome. Besides, when he's not being taken out by dirty hits (a headshot and a slewfoot last season), he's performed like a legitimate top-6 wing, scored at nearly ppg, and outperformed many of his WPG seasons in terms of scoring pace.

The part that's really irksome is, as BoomerTheHero, there's always the element of "smart team vs dumb problem team" to this, and it's condescending. The offers are always short of what you'd pay for a top-6 winger in his prime (which we know that's what you think he is, he's always listed in the top-6 for these things), and it's always a bunch of expendable assets from the acquiring team that we don't want or need.

We know you're trying to buy cheap on a player that has had struggles, but unless there's an explicit trade request or the new GM says he's shopping Laine, there's no reason to sell low, and thus you don't have the leverage to pull a trade like this. We're not stupid.</div></div>

I did not imply anyone was stupid. You are putting words in my mouth there. I implied Laine is a High Risk High Reward asset. If Davidson decides to hold him, so be it. This is mostly a repost of above but since you responded to an earlier part of the thread, here goes.

Here is a list of ways it could "go poorly":

1) Laine could relapse
2) Laine could have a terrible attitude and damage the harmony of a locker room that is all pulling in the same direction
3) Laine could continue to get injured every year and only play 50-55 games
4) Laine could do none of the above and continue to under-perform at his 8.7M salary which would make him the highest paid player on the Habs

Consider for a second that the new GM of the CBJ could also think about all of these points and decide "the juice isn't worth the squeeze". It may happen, it may not, but to pretend it's not possible is a bit silly.

Yes we can win a lot if we end up with an 80+ pts player. But there is RISK. You seem to only value Laine's upside. That's like me expecting a 1st round pick for Josh Anderson.
Forum: Armchair-GM12 hours ago
Thread: So happy together
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BoomerTheHero</b></div><div>Thats not it at all. They are saying that fans like you expect teams to trade players when their value is the lowest so "smart" teams can swoop in and get top players for cheap. Everyone including our FO know this, so why would they trade these assets at their lowest? They wouldnt. until an explicit trade request is made, which it hasnt been for either Laine or Zegras. So no matter how much fans of teams that want top assets for cheap, NHL FOs are not in the business of giving away top players. On top of that everyone knows teams would be putting these players on their top lines, so why would they accept a low price for a player that both the team selling and the buying agree is a top 6 player? they wouldnt</div></div>

I didn't say paying Laine 8.7M was smart. I said it was RISKY, but COULD potentially be a steal if all goes well. Where there is RISK, there is the chance that it doesn't go well.

Here is a list of ways it could "go poorly":

1) Laine could relapse
2) Laine could have a terrible attitude and damage the harmony of a locker room that is all pulling in the same direction
3) Laine could continue to get injured every year and only play 50-55 games
4) Laine could do none of the above and continue to under-perform at his 8.7M salary which would make him the highest paid player on the Habs

Consider for a second that the new GM of the CBJ could also think about all of these points and decide "the juice isn't worth the squeeze". It may happen, it may not, but to pretend it's not possible is a bit silly.

Anyway I think this deal is way more realistic than most Kent Johnson trades ...
Forum: Armchair-GM14 hours ago
Thread: So happy together
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>squashmaple</b></div><div>This is just how Habs fans are. They also think they're getting Zegras at the nadir of his value, too, and the Ducks also have no reason to move him either. It always boils down to "but Montreal media has told us we want him and can get him for cheap, and you should be happy a traditional market is paying you any attention."</div></div>

Thanks for showing your bias plainly for all to see.

I challenge you to look through my historic posts (which are filled with Zegras trades) and find a SINGLE ONE where I did not include the 5OA or Guhle plus additional assets. I'll save you the time, you won't find one!

The comparison between Zegras &amp; Laine is the problem here. You see Laine as having equal or better value to Zegras, but he simply does not. He has not lived up to his draft pedigree, he has had personality issues wherever he went, and he is now dealing with issues so severe that he needed to seek help (and I'm glad he did).
Forum: Armchair-GMSat. at 10:28 a.m.
Thread: What if the Habs get everyone
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Fox_Czar_Cup</b></div><div>Has anyone ever said yes to wanting Armia Dvorak Mesar besides habs??</div></div>

Are you asking if any Ducks fans are open to Zegras for the 5OA? I think the answer is a resounding yes. Why choose between Lindstrom &amp; Silayev, when you can have both? Would they be willing to take on the last year of Dvorak's deal and a few middling picks, I don't see why not. They have the roster space and the cap room, and if Dvorak plays well they can flip him at the TDL for another pick.

As for Rangers fans, If you still see Kakko as a 2nd OA and want to go down the Oilers Puljujarvi route with him, have fun, this deal is for people who are realistic about the fact that he's a 3rd line player who may one day figure it out.