SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Different_Perspective_85

Member Since
Sep. 3, 2020
Favourite Team
Calgary Flames
2nd Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
Forum Posts
105
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 8, 2020 at 10:54 p.m.
Thread: Im a Canucks fan
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>I've seen this kind of muddled math before. Once the Baertschi and Eriksson contracts expire, you can't say "Well, this saves Arizona money because otherwise Arizona would be paying OEL" because at that point, Arizona still has OEL. It is true that Arizona would be saving $7 million over the next two years (only $600,000 this year) but then has five more years of OEL, who would still have a significant value for at least some of them.

The bottom line is that I don't think that Arizona is going to trade OEL in any deal that requires them to take back bad contracts. You can argue that they might trade him for Woo, Demko and next year's first, or maybe only one of the prospects plus the pick, but the Coyotes don't have to give OEL away AND take back garbage.</div></div>

It will be literally impossible for Arizona to trade OEL and not take back cap and that's probably gonna have to include a bad contract or two, there's just no way a team can afford to add his cap hit without sending something back, if Arizona wants to move OEL they're gonna have to play ball or he isn't going anywhere and considering the way his contract is structured combined with his trade protection if they're not flexible in making a deal he won't be going anywhere.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 17, 2020 at 7:14 a.m.
Thread: So here we are
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Different_Perspective_85</b></div><div>I like and totally understand the rationale and I absolutely agree that would be the most ideal. I just don't think it's feasible to orchestrate in that order. For the sake of conversation, if a Dumba &amp; Kunin for Monahan WERE to transpire what/who would you suggest is available to target for a top 6 C? Is there a FA available you'd take a flyer on? Would trading a package including Gaudreau &amp; Hanafin/Gio/Kylington &amp;/or picks get you one if you aren't comfortable with Lindholm to C? I know that it isn't a deal that exists in a vacuum.

I ask (quite sincerely) because here is a corresponding trade &amp;/or FA signing required but that was always going to be the case anyway, regardless of it's this trade or something else (if it even includes Monahan or Gaudreau). This would just fill a different need/hole and there would be a shift in focus as to what this team needs. There seems to be this attitude/expectation that we are somehow going to get better without change, (I haven't seen 1 post that involves trading Gaudreau or Monahan you have liked. The most generous you've been is saying "close") they are going to get a top 4 D for spare parts or nothing and solve all of the significant holes in this roster in one move. For some reason there is also this notion that each team needs to "win" the trade on the surface and it just doesn't work like that.</div></div>
Yeah part of the problem is several teams need a top 6 C (WPG, CGY, MIN, CBJ, probly NSH lol, NYR off the top of my head) and there’s none in free agency (Granlund is better at 2LW, and Haula is a 3C, and those are probably the best options). The only ones that might be available via trade/offer sheet are Domi, the Stromes, and Cirelli. Of those I would only want Domi or Cirelli honestly so options are limited, unless we go big with a Gaudreau package deal with one of our LD for some 1C trade (and yeah that obviously just doesn’t happen out of nowhere). I am open to shakeups I just hate when people make offers worse than the Zucker trade for Gaudreau. Like it’s decent roster player + fringe NHLer + 1st? Not a chance. There have been a few Johnny/Mony trades I’ve liked but people on here generally want to severely underpay and the organization still likes them both so they don’t HAVE to be traded. We don’t have to outright win the trade but we can’t afford to lose it. We have to get something good back, either an elite prospect in a futures package or a top 6 forward/top 4 RD.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ItWasIn</b></div><div>Monahan is such a divisive player. I can see both sides of the debate, of whether or not him or Gaudreau should go.

I agree Monahan is the Flames best C. He's not a #1C, but on this team he is. That creates a big hole. It comes down to whether or not the Flames think Lindholm can fill that hole. Again, that's a hotly debated topic.

The other side of the coin is that yes Monahan is a C, but he is essentially a winger with the way he plays. There are many fans that believe that a Gaudreau trade would hurt the club more than Monahan, because of how much offence 13 creates.


It will be fascinating to see what happens, because 2 years ago there was a very similar debate on the Flames blueline, do they trade Brodie or Hamilton? It felt like Brodie at the time and right now it feels like Gaudreau, but just like how it ended up being Hamilton, I could see it being Monahan that is shipped out.</div></div>
Yeah if I’m being honest, I would prefer to trade Monahan, the Flames offense runs through Gaudreau and he’s the better player, it’s just tough to win without C depth and Johnny might be the only way we can acquire a top one. Interested to see what Treliving does this summer, he’s gotta feel like he’s close to the hot seat so hopefully he makes a couple improvements
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 16, 2020 at 9:25 p.m.
Thread: So here we are
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Different_Perspective_85</b></div><div>So we just are are going to make this one trade and completely stop making trades from then on? No more drafting either? I think there's a chance we could be letting perfect be the enemy of good here. It's not like either team is giving the other garbage. Both are needing a change in direction and in a perfect world, neither would trade either of the players. But Both would be getting marginally/incrementally better and dealing from a position of strength. CGY has Lindholm who may be arguably better suited for 1C (especially if they don't trade Johnny) and need a top 6 right handed RD that can be impactful now while they consider themselves in their competitive window. There may be a few other options, but not many, and not such a natural fit. Minnesota needs a Top 6 C. They aren't getting a Matthews, MacKinnon etc but this is a clear upgrade and they are dealing from an area of depth. It's not perfect for either team, but no trade ever is.</div></div>
I'm not saying that, I'm just saying that because we are not dealing from a position of strength, we need to have a replacement prepared involving our strengths (namely LD). Lindholm may be better suited for 1C than Monahan or he may not be able to handle 1C minutes full time, we don't know. Gambling on that and leaving Backlund at 2C (love the guy, but he's not good enough for that) would be poor planning on GMBT's part, so there would have to be a deal in place to bring in at least a legitimate 2C before we could consider trading Monahan.