May 25, 2021
2nd Favourite Team
Posts per Day
I'd do the Preds deal, but wouldn't give up a 1st unless you were able to talk to Forsberg before pulling the trigger for a "Sign and Trade" deal.. Otherwise not worth a 2/3 month rental giving up last years 1st round pick plus the Bedard draft 1st(yes, I know Top 10 protected, but still).. I like Ingram too, only issue is- Skinner, same age and same trajectory, so why give up assets to get what you already have?? And the Arizona deal would make 0 sense, yes you get Chychryn, but you're giving up Broberg-who is projected to be a similar player to what Chych is now, with less of an injury history(knock on wood hopefully it continues) AND giving away Holloway-who will likely be in the show come March, and a 1st this year- Frig even Eichel didn't fetch this things without conditions on them.. Plus one of the best Glue Guys whom also helps produce in Barrie, yes, I understand Bouchard is right there, but, if this past month has taught anyone anything, Bouchard is still not ready to handle first pairing mins and matchups, and since those 2 PPG's against Calgary the PP has gone ice cold while he's been the main PP QB.. Not saying they can't deal Barrie at some point, just don't think this year would be ideal, and you can likley get more value than a "throw in" for Cap Purposes.... <div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Timmah007</b></div><div>I view fleury as nothing more than a pipe dream to Edmonton. No chance last offseason he was getting moved North of the boarder with the restrictions country had in place. Would be really tough on his personal life. Even right now I don’t see why he would waive sure those restrictions are suppose to get lifted and loosen right up but since covid started we seen that attempted a couple times with same result don’t see a player risking this time will be different until it’s proven to be different. Last offseason smith was coming off a stellar year absolutely no question he was the starter and showed he had enough left in the tank to sign a two year deal. Risky given his age but he did earn it. Kosk was always solid and very good in a back up role when able to manage his starts appropriately. Betting on one more year wasn’t a bad choice since moving his contract would likely involve eating some of the cap hit then pay someone else to come in and get similar results idk how better off would have been. Skinner stepped up huge this year but couldn’t count on that last offseason with only one game of nhl experience. So even with hindsight I’m not sure how much could have done differently. Honestly would have no issue seeing skinner start game one of the playoffs even with limited nhl experience because he has put alot of time and work in nothing has been gifted to him earned everything he’s gotten.</div></div>
I agree, Smith deserved another contract after his stellar play last season, but, where I draw the line- it was his best season in his last 5, he's 39 going on 40 and oft injury prone, the new contract should've been Base- $2m, and incentives on games played up to another $1m, and should he do well maybe give him another year next offseason.. My point on Koskinen was, Skinner has proven he's ready to take the next step after last season- bring him in to play behind Smith, get in maybe 30 games and see what you have for the following season, the person blocking that is Koskinen. And according to those insiders, there was some interest in Mikko to be dealt elsewhere, yes, eating cap would've been something they would've likely had to have done, but if you eat $1.5m in cap making him a $3m backup that would likely get you something in return-whether it a mid-late pick, or another prospect, all in all worth it to open a roster spot for Skinner to play more, let alone $3m in space, even $2m if you bring in another vet goalie to be the backup backup incase of the Smith injury.. Plus, with that cap savings of we shall say $2m it all adds up by the deadline, so, should you need to get another goalie for short term/AT THE DEADLINE, and yes I believe Fleury would possibly be interested in waiving to go to Edmonton for 2/3 months as it could be a "one last hurrah" run to the cup for him. So, in reality it would be a low risk high reward basically everywhere for Edmonton...