SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Kyle_Davidson

Kyle from Chicago
Member Since
Feb. 22, 2018
Favourite Team
Chicago Blackhawks
2nd Favourite Team
Carolina Hurricanes
Forum Posts
9844
Posts per Day
4.4
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 10 at 12:14 a.m.
Thread: Start aiming for playoffs in 2years
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>batman</b></div><div>Kyle_Davidson thoughts on this ACGM?</div></div>

Not a bad projection at all. Of course there are some things I would do differently with unrestricted free agents and RFA contracts, but a solid projection if the hawks goals are to plug holes short term.

I like the Arvidsson signing for what it is worth
I dislike the Martinez signing
I would go longer term with Vlasic since we can afford higher AAV right now.
I would think Lukas Reichel gets a 1 year deal.

There are some ideas here that I think should be corrected
- Lindstrom will need time to develop before playing in the NHL
-Nazar will likely spend a year in he minors
-If the hawks sign a free agent D it will likely be a RD who can help develop Korchinsky.
-The hawks will probably not bring in a goalie unless they move on from Arvid.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 9 at 12:13 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 6 at 10:49 a.m.
Thread: Offseason
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>aedoran</b></div><div>There are 2 things that CapFriendly users get wrong all the time.

1. The value of retaining salary.

2. The value of a cap dump.

If you look what users thought it would cost to retain and what it actually cost at the TDL. It was and is a lot lower than what we predict.</div></div>

It’s understandable for the acquiring team to “overestimate” the “negative value” of the player especially in the context presented here.

When discussing the cost of moving a player at the time it is done has significant implications.

In my opinion the best times to take on a contract are before the draft and free agency OR right before the season starts for a team with low flexibility. The reasons should be rather obvious as to why these values are different to during the deadline.

Again, if Detroit isn’t interested in moving him, or at least not in this specific trade, that’s fine. I don’t think a 4th round pick will get it done either and Chicago is really in a quality vs quantity debate right now. Maybe a team like Nashville would even pay Detroit for Fabbri.

My proposal is based heavily on the draft pick value calculator from puckpedia. Sure, it takes out contextual information like the usefulness of a player like Fabbri, but in the context of moving a 4 million dollar man it says it costs an early 2nd historically. The difference between Tampas and Detroits pick as presented is calculated as a mid-late 2nd (Rd 2 #46). In that case, Detroit comes out slightly ahead in historical value to account for the usefulness of a player like Fabbri. I still think it’s a fair trade, but it depends on who has the appetite to do it.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 28 at 4:48 p.m.
Thread: Next season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Onlyfairtrades1</b></div><div>Your opinion, which means nada to the Rangers. His contract is an easy buy out if Drury wants cap space so there is ZERO chance they give up a 1st round pick to trade him. ZERO.</div></div>

You underestimate the value of flexibility, 6 year buyout at this structure is somewhat limiting especially in the year his cap hit is ~3.5.

Also, I hate to break it to you, but neither your opinion nor mine makes a difference to any executive at the NHL level. Judging by your aggressive style of replying I think you are missing the point of posting on this forum, or at least deriving some sort of pleasure from attempting to put others down. In any case, you are now added to the ignore list not because you shared an opinion on the post, but because you seem like a generally unpleasant person.