SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

SupremeBone

Member Since
Jul. 29, 2020
Favourite Team
Edmonton Oilers
Forum Posts
2462
Posts per Day
1.8
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 15 at 8:18 a.m.
Thread: Younger next year
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CD282</b></div><div>$1.75M for Carrier is too much, not sure why you're so enthusiastic about that signing.

And if Durzi is worth only $4-5M x 5, he sure isn't worth Kulak + two 1sts. That's more than Edmonton paid for Ekholm, for goodness sake.

And Ceci is worth more than a 5th.</div></div>
Carrier is one of the rare bottom-6 forwards that consistently contributes to outchancing and outscoring while also being a physical, forechecking presence. He's a wonderfully effective player. Would be a great player for either or both of Lavoie and Hamblin to play with/learn from and would be entirely worth a 1.75mil cap hit for a couple years.

Durzi is probably worth between 5.25 and 5.75mil on that term. As for the picks, you're willfully misrepresenting the return as the author's trade includes picks coming back. So it's Kulak and 3 total rounds of trade-ups for Durzi. The return for Ekholm was FAR more than that.

A 5th as a return for Ceci is plenty reasonable in my eyes. He's not the cap dump some people make him out to be but whatever his trade value is will be hurt by the fact that, if EDM doesn't win the Cup, there'll be pressure to upgrade at that position in particular.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 15 at 5:41 a.m.
Thread: Younger next year
Overall a solid AGM! I'm particularly keen on your choice of Carrier, your line combos, and your overall goal of getting younger. That being said, there are a few things I'd change:

1.) I'd say you're overpaying Debrusk (~400k), Pickard (~600k), Holloway (~600k), Desharnais (~500k), &amp; Lavoie (~200k) given the context of the term you've offered each of them
2.) I'd say you're underpaying Durzi by around 1mil and don't think SLC will make him available, at least not for that. I'd also rather use that money to target A. Carrier in UFA
3.) I don't imagine Broberg agrees to a 3-year deal and as such would likely end up on a similar deal to the one I proposed Holloway gets (900k * 2yrs). Saves another 400k
4.) That factors out to ~2.7mil in what I'd deem overpayments. For the sake of argument, I'll grant you either the Durzi acq. as listed or that Carrier (or similar) would cost ~4.25mil

Using those savings, I'd prioritise dressing at least a 22-man roster by adding 2 FAs (ideally below age 30), swapping Carrick out for Laczynski, and maybe finding an upgrade on Fischer. I wouldn't be surprised if Hamblin ended up back in EDM next year, either.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 14 at 3:45 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 12 at 10:13 a.m.
Thread: Stealing Vegases lunch money
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sensonfire</b></div><div>The need to sign Marchessault alone erases the space gained from placing Lehner on LTIR next season.

And if trades can easily be made, then they wouldn't be trashed so many times in AGM.</div></div>
Not strictly necessary to do so and, if they do decide to re-sign him, I can definitely imagine him giving them a discount.

Trades get agreed to on here all the time. If yours aren't, it's because you're either not being considerate enough of the others' POV or you're paying too much attention to the few fans from each fanbase that decline everything that doesn't overpay their team. Further, there's a distinct difference between getting "trashed" and getting "feedback". If you're getting trashed, it often means you've failed to account for something significant in your proposal. If you're getting trashed often, you ought to realise it can't <strong>always </strong>be everyone else that's wrong.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 11 at 12:27 p.m.
Thread: The Big Fish
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NucksnOilers</b></div><div>I think Sanheim is a nice fit for us next to Nurse if we get to move out Campbell in the trade and find a suitor for Ceci somewhere else. He would bring stability to Nurse's game, the only issue is the cap hit but if Campbell's contract is gone I feel like it could work. If we can grab him + one of Farabee/TK/Forrester or Tippet in the deal then I think it fills holes we would need to be filled. (We would move Nuge back to 2C in this scenario)</div></div>
I disagree. A.) I don't want to diminish the return from Drai (or McDavid in such a hypothetical) by attaching Campbell to him and B.) I don't see Sanheim as the solution that you seem to. I prioritize the addition of specific pieces to help the team extend and enhance its contention window in spite of losing a player of Drai's quality. I might be able to be convinced that a package including Bonk + Foerster + a 1st + another significant piece or two could be enough to part with Drai (assuming an extension is agreed upon), but I'm quite confident that there would be a more appealing package out there.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 9 at 4:05 p.m.
Thread: Bye bye mikko
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Bheck14</b></div><div>Girard isnt even worth a first and a B+ plus prospect?</div></div>
Yes, that's absolutely my belief.

He's a consistent drag on on-ice results when compared to his team without much reason for it deployment-wise (whether D partners or circumstantial deployment). Further, the results of his D partners are consistently so much better when away from him that it's remarkable (<a href="https://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerreport.php?fromseason=20212022&amp;thruseason=20232024&amp;stype=2&amp;sit=5v5&amp;stdoi=oi&amp;rate=y&amp;v=t&amp;playerid=8479398" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">NST WOWYs</a>). On top of this, he's 5'10, defends scoring areas poorly, and isn't even producing offense at an impressive rate at 5-on-5.

While this may be going too far for others to agree with, I see him as an outright liability and would need to be paid to take him on.