Edit Avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
  • Maximum size: 1MB
Drag image to reposition


Member Since
Jun 13, 2019
Favourite Team
Detroit Red Wings
Apr 19, 1993
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum Threads
Forum: Armchair-GM12 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>A_K</b></div><div>Just generally speaking, the "might as well, gonna lose him for nothing in expansion" argument is flawed. Seattle is taking someone no matter what. So if you get a lousy return for Dunn, you still lose a different player to expansion. The question becomes, is getting a 3rd and a 4th worth losing Dunn AND, say, Blais or Barbashev or Walman? If they really can't get a reasonable offer for Dunn, and they do expose him, that is probably a better situation than getting a 3rd + 4th and losing an additional affordable NHLer.

Now specifically in Dunn's case, the Blues would be dumb to get a crap return for him when they can simply leave Faulk unprotected and play chicken with Seattle. Which of Faulk's seasons do they consider the outlier? If the Blues were to lose Faulk, are they better off with the long-term cap flexibility? I'd say that Faulk lived up to his contract this year, but I'm not expecting him to perform at that level for 6 more years (and Seattle probably isn't either).

All of this might be moot because I think there are a ton of other teams that could use a protection spot on Dunn and could give up better assets: NJD, ANA, NYR, WPG, VAN, VGK (exempt from XD) etc.</div></div>

Fair point. Yeah I don't think Seattle is going to roll the dice on Justin Faulk unless they want some sort of older semi-stable defenseman. I get what you are saying and I think yes you could get probably more for Dunn, but I still think STL will trade away one of the three guys you mentioned or make a deal with Seattle.
Forum: Trade Machine ProposalsSat at 7:54 am
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PuttinOnTheFoil</b></div><div>Intent is to plan for impact of Expansion Draft and lose key assets for nothing. At this juncture, St. Louis needs to protect due NTC: Tarasenko, Schenn, Perron, Faulk, Krug, Scandella. Then need decide who else gets protected: Thomas, Barbeshev, Blais, Kyrou, Dunn, Parayko. In this scenario St. Louis receives young players not requiring protection and draft picks. Idea is to not lose a key player for nothing. I agree drastic and probably too one-sided, but I believe many teams will be looking to teams like Detroit with Cap space and draft picks to make a deal prior to Expansion draft. Note that I did not even mention Hoffman, Schwartz, and Bozak who would need protection consideration if re-signed prior to draft. I placed Parayko in the deal mainly due high $$ allocated to Defense and Dunn due extensive detail that he was not favored in SL and available. This deal would obviously make more sense if the Detroit package included their 2021 Top 10 draft selection vs. lower 1st, but I'm just throwing out thoughts. What's your take on the protected list, someone currently contributing will most likely be taken due many NTC exclusions unless a side deal is made prior.</div></div>

They would protect Parayko over Scandella easily. Also, Seattle is only taking one person so STL can somewhat predict who that might be and trade him. As for Hoffman, Bozak and Schwartz if they want them back they can be signed after the expansion and do not need protecting as seen by so many teams in the last expansion. Sorry but this doesn't make much sense. I mean being a Red Wings fan I'd take it even though we are in a rebuild. The value is just wayyyy too one sided to not take it.