SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Linlan

Member Since
Jan. 8, 2017
Favourite Team
New York Rangers
Forum Posts
614
Posts per Day
0.2
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 13, 2023 at 10:10 a.m.
Thread: Maybe
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Linlan</b></div><div>No roster spot for either player in rangers lineup
Caps have one Defenseman under contract next year, and will be tight on the cap hit. They have no need for their 1st as they should look for a quick retool if they wanna stay competitive
Washington is a Russian factory so I feel Kravtsov can get utilized there



Jones &gt;&gt; Alexeyev, and plays a different style then both those two
Tell me you haven’t followed Kravtsov situation, without telling me you haven’t watched Kravtsov situation</div></div>

Every ranger prospect is “garbage” on this site.. don’t defend yourself it’s a good trade I just don’t see the rangers wanting futures for either guy

Jones especially is a great prospect, and trade piece for them
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 14, 2020 at 10:37 a.m.
Thread: sign twin deals to deangelo and strome and trade for reilly
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Linlan</b></div><div>Well you can drop the “locker room cancer” DeAngelo is among teammates considered a good locker room guy
And as far as the value of Reilly, he’s not worth your package if I get this right
DeAngelo
Georgiev
One of Buchnevich/Chytil
Draft pick x
I can get on board if Buchnevich/Chytil is dropped and the pick is no earlier then 3rd, however the timing is wrong. Reilly has two more years left on contract while DeAngelo and Georgiev are RFA, meaning Toronto can negotiate terms with them while Reilly is a huge risk to lose to UFA in two years</div></div>

I don't think the Leafs do it for less than that was my point. Maybe they would, but Reilly is such a big part of their team that if the Rangers wanted him, they would have to ante up to the table and it would probably hurt. Trading Reilly for that package would hurt the Leafs as well, it's a tough deal for both sides.
Forum: Armchair-GMDec. 13, 2019 at 4:41 p.m.
Thread: How likely Boston accepts this
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Linlan</b></div><div>Can Boston afford to resign Krug, Debrusk and keep depth for a Stanley cup run next year with Backes money?</div></div>

Sorry, I should have elaborated. They don't need to move his money<em> this</em> year. His real money is only 3m(next), so those players become more attractive to teams that need to make it to the floor. Low real money, but a 6m cap hit. His NTC also turns to half the teams in the league next year. It will cost them something, but it really shouldn't be much more than a B prospect or mid round pick. Or they could just buy him out. His cap hit would be 4m and 1m, so they would get relief (2m) without giving up any assets.

To answer your question - Yeah they could. They have about 17m for Krug 6.5m, Debrusk 5.5m - that leaves about 5m for Bjork, Gryzelcyk &amp; maybe Chara - which probably isn't enough, but that's with Backes still on the Books. Move Moore and buyout Backes and they have close to another 5m. Also, that's with the current Cap.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 29, 2019 at 12:32 p.m.
Thread: Nuke bought out
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Linlan</b></div><div>didn't Dallas choose not to give Hartman QO, then they probably don't want him</div></div>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="550" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Stars still want to sign Hartman as Sean also says here. Just a matter of arbitration number being too high to QO the player. Still hope to sign him though. Obviously a risk of losing him now <a href="https://t.co/IIp5WwgK1o">https://t.co/IIp5WwgK1o</a></p>&mdash; Pierre LeBrun (@PierreVLeBrun) <a href="https://twitter.com/PierreVLeBrun/status/1143639287138869248?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Nah, there was a reason behind it. They didn't want to risk the possible arbitration, might've cost them too much.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 7, 2019 at 12:39 p.m.
Thread: Avs Crazy Off Season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Linlan</b></div><div>Nah, Colorado needs to add. Horvat is younger and locked up for three more years then Barrie and on top of that moving up from 16th to 10th in draft? A conditional 2nd does not make up for that difference</div></div>

I can see why either of these teams say no to this trade. But as far as value, I think an elite point producing defenseman hold similar, if not a little more, value than a good two-way 2C. Which is why I used Barrie to move up 6 picks. Age and contract status definitely lean the trade toward Horvat being more valuable, which is why I added in that conditional 2nd rounder for if/when he extends. Maybe the Avs do have to add a little something, but with Barrie being the best player in the trade, I don’t think it needs to be too extreme.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 13, 2019 at 2:45 p.m.
Thread: trying to get the 4th avs fans might wanna help here
Would you trade Buchnevich, Georgiev, and a 1st for Bennett, Puljujarvi, or G.Reinhart?
Those are 3 of the last 7 4th overall selections.

IF you are trading a top 10 pick, you are trading it for additional prospects/picks or in a package for a more established player that is further along in their development.
#4 OA is not enough for Zibenejad.
If you are confident Buchnevich is a top 6 player and not a middle 6'er. That's about fair value. There's still a risk he's only a middle 6'er, but the pick has the risk of not even being an NHL'er. If you wait until a player establishes themselves as a top 6'er, the pick alone is no longer enough. Both teams have to be confident in what they are getting and assume a certain amount of risk, but the team giving up the established player is almost always assuming the larger risk.