Get CapFriendly PremiumGet CapFriendly Premium


Member Since
May 23, 2022
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 3 at 1:07 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 3 at 12:46 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 27 at 1:45 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jacketsman61</b></div><div>Are you seriously suggesting that Draisaitl would cost Laine, Johnson, ++??? You have to think in terms of long term projections. While yes, theoretically they can keep both, the depth on the team will suffer. This is one of those moments where Edm would be more likely to take the sum of the parts considering how much quality is there. Draisaitl is the best player in the deal but the ability to get a top 5 player, a budding young superstar who is cost controlled and effective depth pieces that all fall in the affordability range that can keep your team a contender is just as priceless. Remember, Draisaitl is not likely taking a cheap contract. His number probably starts at 12 mil maybe more. McDavid contract is up the summer after that and I guarantee his number starts at 15 mil but more like 16 mil.</div></div>

Possibly, it really depends on all the pieces that would be involved, who they can select with that top 5 pick (NHL-ready player or not), what pieces are coming back from Edm, and whether or not Draisaitl is coming with an extension (which he is in the scenario). The Oilers would only have 2-years guaranteed of Laine, who is struggling and injury-prone, so he's not exactly at peak value. My point is that the trade would have to be a hockey trade, not futures' based because I can guarantee you that McDavid would be upset with a Draisaitl trade, and if the team gets worse as a result, there's a really good chance he doesn't re-sign even if the future is bright with the addition of KJ and a blue chip prospect.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 27 at 1:14 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 25 at 3:20 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 25 at 12:32 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 22 at 8:04 a.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Huge_Caniac_Abe_Lincoln</b></div><div>The following offseason however is ripe with prime goalies - Ullmark, Saros, Shesterkin - as well as solid 1A type guys to a potential 1B in Schmid (or vice versa). The great (or annoying) thing about the Devils being so young is they can stake next year on a Kakhonen, Nedeljkovic or even Mrazek or Wedgewood, and they will still be one of the youngest teams in the league, with defenders who are going to be getting better at helping out the weaker netminders.

Believe me, I'd like the Devils to do something rash and trade Mercer and Holtz for Gibson, but I don't think it makes a ton of sense to give up prime assets for a tendie that would only be there at the opening of their window.</div></div>

I do agree that NJ shouldn't be making any rash decisions, however, considering they do have Schmid who could be their future 1A, it could make sense to get a guy who could help them win at the start of their window. The only thing though is that if they are giving prime assets for a starting goalie, then 1) they better be sure that they are getting a true number 1 that can be that difference maker and 2) they should be in a position to make the post-season if it's a mid-season trade.

I don't think acquiring Gibson is a bad idea for NJ, but I don't think he checks those two boxes, so if I was Fitzgerald I wouldn't be giving up prime assets for him, or at least not any that are currently contributing to the team or bound to in the future like Nemec. There's no guarantee that guys like Ullmark, Saros or Shesterkin would make it to free agency or sign with NJ but maybe NJ could look at trying to trade for Ullmark and Saros in the off-season.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 14 at 4:09 a.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ricochetii</b></div><div>Anderson and Harris do nothing for Anaheim.
Including Roy in any trade is a bad idea. His market value isn't high enough to justify it.
Moving Barron is an equally bad idea. Growing pains are expected with a 22 year old defenseman. If you aren't prepared to ride out the bumps there's no point developing your own players.
It would take at least a 2024 1st somewhere in the vicinity of 10th overall to acquire Zegras with picks (assuming he is for sale).

If Calgary makes the playoffs and their pick falls in the 20-32 range, we can take it instead of waiting for next year.
Our own 1st will likely be top 10. (8th atm I believe)
We may be able to acquire another 1st at the deadline.

If our 1st is top 10, it would be better to draft our own player in that position, but Zegras is closer to helping a team contend vs. a fresh prospect, so it's at least worth considering.
If we have at least 1 additional 1st rounder, it's a more comfortable decision to make.
If I'm giving up a top 10 pick for him however, I'm not adding much else, if anything.

Consider the Drouin trade which we definitively lost.
Sergachev (9th overall) and a conditional 2nd for a player with similar "warts" that was a former 3rd overall coming off his ELC with a 53 point season.
Zegras has produced more on his ELC, but his first contract negotiation was contentious, his production dipped, and he's been injured twice since signing it.
Montreal needs high end talent, but that doesn't mean just any talent. If you're paying a high price you have to be more certain of the player you are getting.
The last thing we need is another Drouin scenario.</div></div>

Zegras isn't anything like Drouin as you mentioned, and I would say what caused Drouin's downfall was the expectation of being a 25-30 goal scorer in his hometown. They expected Drouin to be what he wasn't (at the NHL-level at least) and save the team which desperately needed a goal scorer. That being said MTL doesn't need another center-winger, even though he would be a great add, the cost would just be too great. I think the package would start with Reinbacher (unless Anaheim drafts a RHD in the 2024 draft) + 1st (even if it's the one likely to be FLR's) + a roster player.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 12 at 2:19 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 11 at 2:44 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 11 at 2:23 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BillytheKid3</b></div><div>There's speculation because teams are calling about him. I don't blame teams seeing what it will take.

It'll take A LOT unfortunately, and the trade above is in the right ballpark.

We don't want to see Niemela, Robertson and 2nd anymore lol</div></div>

Yeah, who knows? Depends on what his availability really is, I feel like insiders often try to stir the market sometimes especially when there might be a reason for a team to trade a player. I don't see why Staois would want to trade Chychrun at this point unless he's justifiably worried that he might not re-sign or he gets an offer that improves his team. The return would then really depend on that, I don't disagree with the value of the return suggested was just saying I don't see the motivation for OTT to just want two draft picks, unless the main target of the trade is Liljegren and the picks are just there to balance out the value. If Liljegren is just being viewed as a good/useful roster that is a fit but isn't a must-have. then the trade just seems like Ottawa trying to recuperate their assets which would only make sense if Chychrun wants out/they expect him to want out. Even then I highly doubt he would end up in Toronto even if the Leafs were willing to pay up to some extent.

I feel like there's usually a 1st in there at least but unfortunately, you'll probably keep on seeing underwhelming packages.

From Toronto's perspective, I don't see why they would move Liljegren, even if they wanted Chychrun. The Leafs should be looking to add to their dcore without subtracting guys who are contributing now and one of the few guys who is young on their blueline.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 11 at 1:53 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 10 at 12:25 a.m.
I get the point is just to show that the Leafs could keep Marner as they should and that the other names just serve as just placeholders but I'm going to talk about the signings anyways just to kind of predict what the Leafs might do.

Liljegren probably gets 3M+ (unless they go for a 1 or 2-year deal), and Walker probably goes to whatever team is giving the best combination of money and term which is likely not going to be the Leafs. Instead they probably sign a guy like Tyler Myers on a 1-year deal for 3M, so basically no Jost and spending to the cap. I think Tanev would probably get something more like 3.5-4M on a 2 to 3-year deal, but who knows maybe he does take a more team-friendly deal with more term. Benoit probably has earned himself a contract extension, so would replace Caleb Jones with him. Talbot is definitely not getting below 3M with the way he's playing, he likely re-ups with LA, and I think the Leafs will just go with Woll, Jones with a decent raise, and possibly bring back Samsonov on a prove it deal if he redeems himself at some point. Otherwise, I think they would be comfortable with Woll and Jones, knowing that Hidelby could contribute if one of them struggles next year.

Bertuzzi probably is let go but maybe if Robertson is traded, the Leafs could sign Bertuzzi and Domi to matching 3.75-4M deals (no Amadio), but I do think it's highly likely that Bertuzzi is allowed to walk. If Dillon Dube goes unqualified, I could see him being a project signing instead of a vet like Carter. I think at least one of McMann, Holmberg, Steeves or Minten will be on the roster for next year.