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

JeffW

Member Since
May 30, 2017
Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
Location
Peterborough on
Forum Posts
3050
Posts per Day
2.11
Forum Threads
212
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 27 at 8:23
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 17 at 11:13
Thread: Chris
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 14 at 6:39
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Wqrrior</b></div><div>three?

I try not to be optimistic about Jakes value, but Bennet's deal this TDL kinda changed that. I don't expect him to be quite as valuable, but the same reasons for value exist. Colorado might not be a fit, but the target of the value is more pertaining to the expansion draft.

If these two are going to be exposed likely anyways, then I made the assumption that its better to sell them off for assets rather than outright losing them or paying to keep them. Compher makes more money than he is worth (I struggle to believe that he would pull a 2nd -- he had a rough start, though I have seen he has started to turn it around a bit), and Graves isn't quite what he was last year.

That's not to say they are valueless or I wouldn't propose this in the first place. Idea is simply to give value towards what is likely lost anyways. If there's no value, then I learn from it and walk away. Whole purpose of this website is to throw something out there and see if it will stick. I don't think anything ever really sticks, but at least there's the ability to bring it as close as reasonably viable. No fit, no problem.</div></div>

Yes 3, because after this trade is done seattle still gets to take a guy for free..

Btw two established NHL players for a 2nd and a project makes no sense to a contender.

If seattle picks graves then that's okay you can replace him within the system.. they pick compher or donskoi then again you replace him within the system.. you lose all 3 it's a major setback