Salzy

Member Since
Nov 8, 2018
Favourite Team
Anaheim Ducks
Forum Posts
706
Posts per Day
1.49
Forum Threads
29
Forum: Armchair-GM3 hours ago
Thread: Lines at Morning Skate
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ngikas</b></div><div>Idk how much the typical/average ducks fan complain about specific players but if it’s anything like the Bruins fans get ready to hear it from all the pink hats who don’t know a whole lot about hockey with heinen. The guy imo is a really solid defensive minded forward. He lost his offensive confidence here in Boston for sure but I think a change of scenery will serve him well. I think a lot of bruins fans who bashed on him will soon wish he was a Bruin again by next season at the latest. Idk much about Ritchie except that he’s struggled to progress in his development. Seems like a grittier but less skilled version of heinen.</div></div>

That trade injects some needed Skill into the Ducks line-up, Ritchie in my opinion has reached his ceiling and is a bottom 6 guy that provides some sandpaper, and didnt really have a purpose on ANA

I believe he is better suited on a contender like Boston and Heinen seems like he was falling out of favour there, good trade for both teams in my eyes

The Kase deal makes the Heinen Ritchie swap make more sense for both teams as well
Forum: Armchair-GM3 hours ago
Thread: Lines at Morning Skate
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mytduxfan</b></div><div>Rakell on the RW sucks. Love the 3rd line. I've enjoyed watching Jones' play of late. Steel also seems to be taking steps forward finally too. Both need to work on their shooting in the off-season though. Our RW is just so bad. Looking forward to seeing the new guys in action, but expecting a loss tonight.



Did you see the defence? Barf! I really hope Djoos bumps Larsson out of #3LD once Fowler is back. He has been awful this year. In fact, in looking for a silverlining for this season, our top 4D has been pretty strong. I am cautiously hopeful of Djoos becoming a solid addition on our bottom pairing.</div></div>

Im really excited to see how Milano plays with Rakell and Getz, Steel with Heinen is something I would like to see as well but Steel and Jones together is good too

I'm surprised to see Djoos getting PP time
Forum: Armchair-GM23 hours ago
Thread: Lets See What Weve Got
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>Okay, since you and I have virtually nothing to look forward to until the draft lotteries in the spring, here's my handicapping of the draft pool:

1. LaFreniere
2. Byfield
3. Raymond
4. Drysdale
5. Holtz
6. Perfetti

These are Anaheim's choices in order, of course. Other teams won't have such an elevated need for a defenseman.

What I'm worried about is Ottawa having one pick ahead of ours. Is their strategy to get two of the really highly-rated forwards? Or one star forward and the best defenseman in the class? If the latter, then Ottawa can assure themselves of achieving that aim by picking Drysdale at #3 or #4 and not waiting until their second pick to take him.</div></div>

After Laf my ranking is way different than yours ahah

1. Laf
2. Stutzle
3. Byfield
4. Drysdale
5. Raymond
6. Perfetti
7. Lundell
8. Holtz
9. Rossi

Say the pick order doesnt change from now
Det - Laf
LA - Byfield
OTT
ANA
OTT (SJS)

I 100% think Drysdale goes 3 in that scenario if OTT wants him, They know we need RD help and he likely wont be there at 5, I'd be fine with that if we get Stutzle at 4
Forum: Armchair-GM23 hours ago
Thread: Lets See What Weve Got
I like the moves made

Getting a potential top 6er in Heinen who at his lowest season is more productive point-wise than Ritchie, I'll make that 1 for 1 every chance I get

Taking a Flier on Milano, who like the Heinen deal, worst case posts similar production to Shore, but has upside

Irwin deal is pretty much a wash but we get a 6th so I guess we came out on top there

Sprong seemed doomed to stay in SD, not the biggest fan of Djoos, would have rather seen a right shot Dman come back but oh well

We add Joel Persson for a 7th, and A.Redmond nice to add a depth RD with how much we need one at a small cost

A 4th for Grant is what I've been saying the return will be for weeks, no surprise there but at least we get the pick we gave for Deslauriers back

Gonna lump the Kase deal in here too, Kase for whatever reason wasn't really working here, Getting a first and a solid B prospect in Andersson is nice, Backes is of little consequence to us

Needs haven't changed from a week ago but we've added some nice pieces at some areas of weakness that could turn into steals for us, I'd give the Ducks deadline week or so a solid B, sure we could have seen a better return for Kase but I'm personally a fan of that deal for us still, Heinen and Milano could turn out great but worst case they are a wash for what we gave up, added a 1st, 4th and 6th, so while not spectacular it was a good week of business I feel
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 2:28 pm
Forum: Armchair-GMMon at 10:58 am
Thread: TDL RHD
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PrimeDatsyuk</b></div><div>You must be crazy if you wouldn't do this for Manson alone.

First of all, if the second is too much, change it to a third/fourth, but no way would this package get Manson only.

Second of all, if you actually read the description of the trade, you would see that I put "*Could also trade a package for Barrie, then flip that onto this trade (ANA wants picks, Barrie wants playoffs)" meaning that we could trade Barrie to a contender, then flip that package to the ducks. Read the full trade next time.</div></div>

I did read the full trade, Can't comment on a mystery package value if it isn't there

Ducks are only moving Manson for a young impactful RD/top 6 foward potential type player +, RD is our biggest need, LD is our biggest area of strength we aren't going to subtract from Rd to add to LD

Ducks and Leafs dont talk Manson without Lily + being invovled, we arent moving Manson and not filling needs

Learn to look at both teams needs next time :tearsofjoy
Forum: Armchair-GMSun at 8:35 pm
Thread: Deadline Rebuild
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mytduxfan</b></div><div>I like the fact you've taken a completely different approach to address our issues. Despite being a big believer in keeping Manson, I actually quite like the trade you've put together, especially considering that TOR a risk for not actually making the playoffs. I think the value is absolutely there. I just wouldn't personally do that deal because I don't like that RS without Manson. I am not on the Julius Honka hype train at all and certainly would never even consider playing him top pairing. Would rather just get a 2nd or 3rd for Grant. I don't understand why some fans want him signed. He's a neat player, but nothing special and totally movable. If we keep him, he only gains further leverage to demand a stupid contract after the good year he's had. No thanks. Don't understand moving Rowney. He's been good us and all we're returning is a few late round picks. Not worth it to me considering we'd probably spend more trading for a replacement or overpay on someone at UFA.</div></div>

Im on the same boat with Manson, Hate to see him go but if we can get a package like this for him I'd pull the trigger, and depending on the Pesce injury this may be a possibility

J. Honka may not be the ideal option but if we can get a player like that for Grant, who is a 4th liner and nothing more I'd take a flier on Honka, to be fair though I've always been a big fan of his

I don't see us getting more than a 4th for Grant tbh, I would love to get more but I was trying to be more realisitic with my returns and not absolute best case scenario, He should 100% get moved for the best offer tomorrow regardless what it is

Yeah the more I look at the Rowney deal the more I even question it, I think I was just having fun making trades, I figured his role could be filled by the combo of Backes/Comeau though
Forum: Armchair-GMSun at 7:52 pm
Thread: Deadline Rebuild
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Slezzy21</b></div><div><a href="/users/salzy" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@salzy</a> first of Gotta apologize I just have seen to many stupid Manson trades. But I see your point of view and respect it. I personally need a 2nd round for grant because I rather keep him and Honka is probably not gonna pan out. For the other trade I just see it being an underpayment for Manson. I know that sounds a little silly but his presence is so valuable in the playoffs. Plus he's got the term and a great cap hit. Not to mention, the pick is conditional and I don't like the prospects we can get back. To add onto that I don't think its good to take on another cap dump. Then I just completely disagree with the retention on Rowney and getting Cody Ceci despite the pick we receive with him.</div></div>

I broke down the CAR trade like this in my mind
Manson = Honka + 1st
Miller DZ = JK (I see miller being valued at a 4th/5th without retention and DZ being a 6th/7th)

There is no team that will give a second for Grant, and holding on to him for nothing is poor asset management, we can trade him and sign him in the offseason if we want to keep him that bad

Worrying about someones playoff presence with the team in the situation we are in is also mismanagement, I love Manson and would hate to see him go but getting a really good RD prospect and a mid 1st would be a great return for him, he isn't the same player he was a few seasons ago

His contract adds to his value and BM should take advantage of that and not hold on for the sake of it especially if CAR gets desperate

Taking on minor cap dumps would be fine (Under 3M cap hits for a year) we aren't competing next season so we might as well use a valuable asset in our cap space

a 4th and a 5th for Rowney would be a good return for him, and taking Ceci to play RD for 20 games doesn't affect us at all

This team is 2 seasons away from competing best case, that leaves one year of Manson who may regress further by that time, His value won't be higher than it is now and that should be capitalized on