SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Redbeard53

Member Since
Jun. 8, 2016
Favourite Team
Philadelphia Flyers
2nd Favourite Team
Nashville Predators
Forum Posts
34
Posts per Day
0.0
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 12, 2023 at 2:22 p.m.
Thread: Cahta Haht
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TheBigFlyera</b></div><div>The flyers just took a 2nd and a top RHD prospect for $8M lol Campbell has $20M left on his deal and he sucks and u think it’s only gonna be a 3rd to move him? Oilers fans are gonna have a rude awakening then when he costs you a 1st ++ to move his contract lol.</div></div>

OK. Well based on that. Then consider the 25 1st and one of the prospects to take on Campbell. So it would be a 2nd, a 24 1st, and a prospect for Hart? Doesn't really matter how you break it down. I think this is very close to what the Flyers could anticipate getting for Hart. Granted, thats without a bidding war. Though...this trade wouldnt be likely considering the word is that noone will trade for Hart until the release of the report and I believe thats not going to be released until after the draft? I'd much prefer a '23 1st with any trade for Hart, but seems that is not likely.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 9, 2023 at 2:36 p.m.
Thread: Wheelin and Dealin Danny
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KrakBirds23</b></div><div>Common feel in Seattle is they were playing with house money come the playoffs. They aren't going to send a first for Laughton when they could sign a FA to do the same thing and at least control the cost/term of it. I could see them trading a 2nd or 3rd but also dependent a couple of variables - Do they resign RFA Geekie? And can they find someone to take on Wennberg?

Past that I think you don't see them make a move like this until after the 23/24 season when contracts start to come off the books.</div></div>

Maybe Throw Wennberg into the deal as a dump? That could make the 2nd rd pick become the 1st. I do agree tho, a 1st straight up is probably overpay, but with Laughton you know what you are getting and he plays in all situations and all through the lineup. That is valuable to most teams imo.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Quillanrocks</b></div><div>Having players who can play in 2-4 years is important to this club. Also, forward is a position of strength and Laughton doesn't improve upon the forward roster they already have, certainly not at the cost of a 1st rounder that will play in any # of years. If anything, they may need to subtract from the forward core depending on whom they retain (Sprong) and who may get outplayed but the youth coming up.</div></div>

No guarantee a late first ever even plays. I'd have to look up the statistics, but its hit or miss. With Laughton you know he can play and plays well and plays hard. All really depends what Seattle management is looking to do. I dont think this is as far fetched as you may think.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 8, 2023 at 4:21 p.m.
Thread: Lets play around here
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NMAvsFan</b></div><div>That's a price the Avs can't really say "no" to but I can't imagine Philly would be okay retaining that much for that long. They might have to send those picks to another team (or two) to get additional retention but I'm not sure any team has ever retained for that long on a contract.</div></div>
Arizona is the only other team that I know of that retained money for more then 1 year and I think they did it for 4 years for OEL. If its done at the trade deadline, its only a little over 2 years and if they retain less and a 3rd team is entered to retain money as well, Col sends the draft pick. If the goal is to just get rid of Hayes to make room for a younger player, then the return is as much as I expect. If they want to maximize the return, they offer to retain 50% and see if they can get a bidding war going.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>swissmontana</b></div><div>before this week, I would agree. but the flyers just took on cal peterson, so it seems like they are fine tanking for a while</div></div>
Yeah. After the Provorov trade. I dont think anything is "off the table" anymore. Briere sounds like he wants to do a complete tear down and rebuild. Which to me sounds like load up on picks for the next couple years and shoot to be competitive in about 5 years when the picks start developing.
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 2, 2018 at 4:55 p.m.
Thread: Flyers 19-20
I was JUST about to do this. I agree with most of this.
I think Hagg comes in around 1.3-1.5. But 1.75 would not be an overpayment by any means. Hopefully its a 3 year deal though.
I do not think Laughton gets resigned. I think Vorobyov takes his spot.
I think Lyon gets an even mil.
IF Simmonds gets resigned, I think you are in the right ballpark(obviously this is all depending on how he does this year)
Sanheim is an interesting amount. I think if he thrives on PP2, then you are in the right ballpark, but if he struggles, he will get something like Hagg's amount.
Provorov, you are probably dead on. I hope they can get him a little less, because Patrick/Lindblom/Myers will all need a deal the year after, but who knows what the cap will be and who Seattle takes, lol.

Overall, pretty realistic......are you sure you're a Flyers fan. lol
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 10, 2018 at 3:20 p.m.
Thread: Tavares is an option. As doubtful as I see it, he could be signed and not kill t
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Eli</b></div><div>Great point. For a non-basketball fan who wouldn't understand simple examples if you showed me five of them, do sign and trade deals bring back as much as trades of guys currently on fair contracts? If not, about what percentage off?

Thanks!

Whoooo boy....

Lesseee here. Are you paying me to teach you to count? No.

No, you are not.</div></div>

The amount traded for him was just a guess. Tavares will want 8 years, at least that's my guess, no matter where he plays, he will want that 8th year. So to do that he either needs to be traded before July 1st, or signed by the NYI and then traded. So if I were GM of the NYI, I would want a haul to send him to any team, and to a division rival, yes, it would cost more. Its just hard to gauge what the asking price would be.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NateElder12</b></div><div><a href="/users/Eli" target="_blank">@Eli</a>

lol you're not making any sense.. You don't agree that paying him $77M over 7 OR $72M over 8 is better than the $88M over 8 that is reflected above. I said giving up picks and prospects for $72M over 8 is fine with me, but giving up all of those picks and then a prospect but still paying $88M over 8 just seems like a massive overpayment. Sorry that i just can't agree with you on that man.</div></div>

You are looking at total $$$ and thinking the GM can decide if he wants to give that to him over 7 or 8 years, if Tavares demands 8 years, and wants lets say 88 mil, thats what you get, if he only wants 7 years, and 77 mil, then you see if you can trade for him, add that 8th year, and see if you can still keep it at 77 mil. I just dont see him signing for less then 10.5mil no matter how many years he is signed for.


<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>alwaysnextyear</b></div><div>I agree with your premise that Snow (and any other GM in his situation) would be incredibly smart to try for a sign-and-trade if they think there's a decent chance their asset walks for nothing. It would definitely get them back a significant package of assets. The problem is in evaluating what that return would be, because this type of trade just doesn't seem to happen in hockey like it does in basketball.</div></div>

The value of the return IMO would be:
X for Western Conference team
X+Y for Non-division Eastern conference team
X+Y+Z for divisional team.

But who the hell knows what that team is thinking at this point. I am sure the closer to July 1st it gets, the more they will panic.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 20, 2018 at 4:51 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 20, 2018 at 4:36 p.m.
Thread: free agency
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rangersandislesfan</b></div><div>Yeah, Carlsson isn't a 8M guy.</div></div>

I think he will get that on the open market. But no way he is getting that from Hexy.

Here you have 3.6 mil in cap space (at 81 mil, i thought it is supposed to be between 78-80). Lets say next year it goes up another 3 mil. Then you leave yourself having to sign Provorov and Konecny, and to some extent Sanheim. While losing Simmonds, Lehtera, Raffl and Weal and goalies, which clears 17.7 mil. So roughtly 23 mil to sign those 3 and replace the other 6. Prov-7-8 mil, Konecny-3-5 mil(unless he scores like 40 in which case 6-7), Sanheim-most likely 2 mil. High end you are left with &lt; 8 mil to sign 6 or so players. So it may be feasible, but you limit yourself for years to come with signing Carlson, also he is getting 7 or 8 years, not 6.