SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

ML16

Member Since
Aug. 25, 2020
Favourite Team
Montreal Canadiens
2nd Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
Forum Posts
117
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 14, 2023 at 8:40 a.m.
Thread: TDL Draft 2023
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>You can make the argument that Joel Edmundson with 50% retention is worth a second, although I don't think so, and you can argue that the-unsigned-whose-rights-are-about-to-expire Jason Struble and a fourth are worth a same-slot third, although I don't think so, but what does Helge Grans have to do with this?</div></div>

My aim with the Edmundson trade was filling an organizational need by adding a promising RHD, thus Gelre. But Edmundson doesn’t have to be traded this year, nor with retention, so he must fetch more thab just a prospect, hence the 2nd and 3rd. Because of Edmundson’s injury, I’m also adding Struble - good yet expendable LHD prospect - and a 4th as collateral to get It done, hopefully!
Forum: Fauteuil - DGAug. 6, 2022 at 1:53 p.m.
Thread: 2024-2025
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gmgb</b></div><div>Hard pass from NSH. That's too high a price to pay for forward depth they don't need.</div></div>

As a +55% FO center who can reasonably achieve 50 pts / season locked up midterm at 4.5M, I think Dvorak fetches at least a 2nd and good prospect from pretty much any contender needing a viable middle-6 forward before the end of his contract.

I concede that Nashville already has Sissons as a great FO specialist (on an even greater contract under 3M) and might not be the ideal trade candidate for Dvorak, fair enough.

But for the discussion sake, what would be the asking price for Carrier? With 24M locked up long term on the Predators’ top-4 Ds, he seems like an expandable? What are the organizational needs?
Forum: Fauteuil - DGJul. 30, 2022 at 12:32 p.m.
Thread: Roadmap to 2023-2024
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LIRIK</b></div><div>Not sure they'd match 4M. I'm not even sure i'd like MTL to offer him 4M and give a 2nd. He's been very inconsistent so far.

I didn't make the ACGM, but i think the 3rd is to take Hoffman for 1 year since this happen at 2023 summer.</div></div>

Indeed! That trade would be scheduled for next offseason, when Hoffman has only one year left on his contract, so that the incentive to take him on remains palatable.

As for Comtois, the trade obviously postulates that he doesn’t explode points-wise (so that he can be signed under 4M once acquired for a package where the best asset is a 2nd round pick) and that Anaheim deems him expandable in their current rebuild. On top of the 2nd and 3rd round picks, Anaheim could also obtain another pick at TDL 2024 if Hoffman performs, especially at 50% retention.
Forum: Fauteuil - DGJul. 27, 2022 at 7:24 p.m.
Thread: 2023 Offseason - Jumpstarting the Rebuild
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Meeqs</b></div><div>You need to decide if WPG is competing still or rebuilding. If they are competing then assets like Dvorak make sense but not prospects and picks. Vice versa if they are rebuilding. You need to figure out the other teams needs and make a deal that helps both sides accomplish what they want. Even if lets say Dvorak + 1st isn't too far off from what a rental usually would be you could likely find something better.

Same problem with the 2nd deal. Colorado is in win now mode. Prospects and Picks are useless to them. While Girard makes all the sense in the world for MTL at this point, they don't really have anything that makes sense for Colorado. "They need cap space" isn't a real argument imo. It can show why a player might be available but the trade still needs to make sense</div></div>

Regarding the Dubois deal, the headline comments mention that depending on the Jets’ primary objective, that deal would either be Dvorak/Anderson-centered (still compete) or Dach-centered (retool). I opted in the scenario for Dvorak, adding a (presumably) late 1st as a standard 1 year rental fee to make it worthwhile for the Jets, along with a cheap middle-6 RFA winger in Pitlick and a power forward nearing the end of his NCAA cursus in Tuch. The Jets don’t seem to need D prospects, so I thought that package would be appealing, actually.

For Colorado however, I concur, in retrospect. The proposal assumed that Harris swims rather than sink in his first full NHL season and becomes an interesting, cost-controlled 3rd pairing option to play behind Toews-Byram - and was likely influenced by the recent Bjorkstrand deal for the incentive, but Colorado is aiming for a dynasty and Girard is a luxury they’ll likely be able to afford, until Byram’s ELC expires at least. The target would have been nice, but a trade window seems premature at best. (Maybe Carrier from Nashville would be a better fit as a mid-20’s target, especially since he’s a natural RHD.)
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 14, 2022 at 6:53 p.m.
Thread: 2022-2023 After TDL 2023
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Windjammer</b></div><div>I can't see it. The Jets just don't have the cap space to waste.</div></div>

Don’t the Jets still have +15M left under the cap with basically only Dubois and Appleton to renew? Absorbing Armia’s 3.4M would be very highly manageable.

It’s more a question of what incentive could make it worth it for both parties.

The Habs can keep Armia for now, there’s more opportune cap relief scenarios to explore and a (likely high) 3rd is probably the best offer they can make as incentive to take on the contract without retention.

The Jets are still hoping to contend while Scheifele-Dubois are under control, they’re abysmal on the PK; Armia would fill an actual need, at a palatable AAV for a role player who’s at his best on « cycle lines » and special units. Not a pure cap dump, thus. And the Jets lack a 2nd and a 4th next year, so obtaining a (likely high!) 3rd would help them have more leeway at next year’s draft.

Would be quite ironic that Armia returns back to Winnipeg the same way he arrived in Montreal!
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 14, 2022 at 6:21 p.m.
Thread: 2022-2023 After TDL 2023
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CHAR</b></div><div>&gt;&gt; Would two big-bodied recent top-60 pick prospects (LW and LD) be incentive enough for Anaheim to take on Hoffman's contract without retention?

I doubt it. The wall you hit with that proposal is Anaheim has a very deep prospect pool so they don't need to be adding quantity of prospects. For the LD kid if he's not better than Lacombe or Thrun or Zellweger what's the point. For the winger the Ducks already have his Northeastern team mate Sam Colangelo who looks like a better prospect.

You'd probably get more interest if the offer was picks. That would spread out the prospect ages rather than clump it up and the Ducks would be free to take any kid they really liked from what ever draft class.

Or you could blow them away with a nice high-end prospect rather than a couple of B-ish kids.</div></div>

Okay, I thought since Anaheim already had 6 picks in the first 3 rounds next year, the Ducks would rather seek former high picks (2nd rounders) on good trajectories (especially Struble) rather than futures.

I wouldn’t dilapidate an « A » prospect as an incentive for taking on 2 years of Hoffman - considering notably that buying him out would remain palatable (1.6M until 2026) - but if the Habs’ (likely high) 3rd round suffices to offload him for « future consideration », I’d pull the trigger, gambling that Dadonov/Drouin/Allen with maximum retention can still provide worthwhile assets for the rebuilding Habs’ crucial 2023 draft.