SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

TheGloriousOne

Member Since
Feb. 25, 2017
Favourite Team
Winnipeg Jets
2nd Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
Forum Posts
107
Posts per Day
0.0
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 16, 2019 at 9:41 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 30, 2019 at 7:37 p.m.
Thread: 2019-20 Toronto Maple Leafs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>aedoran</b></div><div>2. The Detroit trade - Why would Steve Yzerman trade away a $6 million cap credit in the contract of Henrik Zetterberg? Because right now, they don't need that cap space. This is a rebuilding team that has the ability to use their cap as a great trade chip and it would not surprise me if the Wings would try this summer to land a good young player by using that cap space. Zetterberg is not coming back, in my opinion. I am not a medical professional but a degenerative back condition doesn't sound like something that's going to heal back up to the point where you could play in the NHL again. Now, if he wants to retire as a Red Wing, when his current contract expires, I'm sure Yzerman would have no issue signing him to a one-day contract like Alfredsson did in Ottawa and they can have Henrik Zetterberg Day in Detroit. But I think that many teams are going to look at William Nylander this summer and see a possible high-reward reclamation project and be willing to give up some assets, as long as Toronto is also willing to sweeten the pot on their end. Trevor Daley adds some Cup experience and depth on the backend, Luke Glendening would be a great top nine forward addition that could swap places with Connor Brown at any given moment, and of course, Zetterberg provides some much-needed cap relief. Meanwhile, Detroit gets a decent young defender in Borgman, and another core player in Nylander to add to Larkin, Mantha, etc.</div></div>

ZETTERBERG HAS RETIRED! and done several interviews where he has said he’s retired. Since his back is what caused his retirement LITR means we can use all $6.084M if needed. So there is NO reason to move him. I’m not sure why you’d want to take Z’s contract anyways. If you think Detroit should its cap space to their advantage why would they pay Toronto to take Z's contract?

<a href="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en&amp;q=is+henrik+zetterberg+retired&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&amp;rls=en&amp;q=is+henrik+zetterberg+retired&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;oe=UTF-8</a>

Detroit shouldn’t go out and spend cap because they have it. They aren’t far enough along in their rebuild to do that. Now if you want to trade Nylander for Daley and Glendening. Ok I have no problem with that.[/quote]

The reason you include Zetterberg (or Johan Franzen for the record, he would also work in this deal for the same reason) if you're Detroit is simply because I don't believe Daley and Glendening would be enough to get the deal done, specifically because of Daley's injury history and age. However, if you put Zetterberg into the mix, you suddenly open yourself up to being able to ask the Leafs for more than just Nylander. Detroit would still have an abundance of cap space even if they made this move and Nylander is still young enough that he could be a great contributor in his prime years when the Wings have a great team around, once prospects like Rasmussen and Zadina, among the others they are going to bring in over the next few years, that go along with more established core players like Larkin, Nylander, Mantha, etc. I will completely agree to the fact that the Wings could probably command more along with Nylander if they are willing to include Zetterberg, but I do think moving that cap credit could be beneficial to the Wings in terms of adding young pieces to the rebuild
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 30, 2019 at 11:59 a.m.
Thread: 2019-20 Toronto Maple Leafs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Caniac2000</b></div><div>Carolina have to resign Aho, all that glorious cap space is going to be flushed down the toilet with that one deal, plus the effect of Teravainen's extension, throw in Williams, Mrazek, McElhinney, Nedeljkovic and some of the prospects, and there really isn't a lot. Marleau being added to this lineup hurts them, you've seen the canes go 2OT in game 7 vs Washington, OT in game 1 vs the isles and regulation in game 2 against the isles, and it's because they're so young they can get away with this. The other criticism I have is Carolina's blue line is what makes them special, why would they make such a drastic change to what makes them so dangerous?</div></div>

You make several very fair points. In reference to the cap concern, this would take up quite a bit of space but I also think Carolina could swing a deal this summer that involves sending Faulk and Darling to Edmonton, bringing in Lucic and Puljujarvi and immediately buying out Lucic. So they get the money from Faulk and Darling (the latter, by the way, would then likely be bought out by Edmonton), plus a bit of relief by buying out Lucic and that adds some cap space. I personally think a guy like Williams, at this stage of his career, would be willing to take a $3 million deal, and you could likely reason with Mrazek that he should be on a shorter deal just to prove what we've seen this year is real, something like a two year, $4 million deal. In reference to McElhinney and Nedeljkovic, I personally think you choose one or the other to be the backup next year and the deal with Toronto gives you Garret Sparks as a third string. And lastly, why make a change to their defense when it's their point of strength? So that they can add more of a scoring punch. Johnsson would be able to add a very good two-way, speedy offensive style into the Canes lineup that I think would really compliment their stingy strong defensive strength very nicely, and if it would cost them van Riemsdyk, I think they'd be willing to do it because even if you deal Faulk and TVR, you're still going to have Slavin, Hamilton, Pesce and de Haan as your core on the backend, along with Jake Bean who's coming along very nicely.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 29, 2019 at 12:50 p.m.
Thread: 2019-20 Toronto Maple Leafs
It makes me quite excited to see what I put up got so much, shall we say, attention, so let me explain myself on a couple things cause there was some very fair criticism:
1. The Carolina trade - The Canes would have the cap space to take on Marleau's contract given that they are a fairly young team and could also move out one of their many defenders, like Justin Faulk, this summer. However, it is fair to question why they would given Marleau's age. I think Marleau be willing to go there based on the success they have had in the playoffs this year, but I also think Carolina would be more than willing to add the experience of Marleau to an otherwise young lineup, especially with another rookie likely playing next year on the team in Martin Necas. But, the Leafs would have to give up something good to move Marleau out, and I believe if you throw Johnsson (or Kapanen if you prefer, I personally prefer Kapanen over Johnsson) into the deal along with a couple other younger players (like Sparks and Oziganov), they'd be willing to part with the package I listed. And you can always remove Fleury from the deal if it helps get it done because McGinn and TVR are the big reasons to do the deal.

2. The Detroit trade - Why would Steve Yzerman trade away a $6 million cap credit in the contract of Henrik Zetterberg? Because right now, they don't need that cap space. This is a rebuilding team that has the ability to use their cap as a great trade chip and it would not surprise me if the Wings would try this summer to land a good young player by using that cap space. Zetterberg is not coming back, in my opinion. I am not a medical professional but a degenerative back condition doesn't sound like something that's going to heal back up to the point where you could play in the NHL again. Now, if he wants to retire as a Red Wing, when his current contract expires, I'm sure Yzerman would have no issue signing him to a one-day contract like Alfredsson did in Ottawa and they can have Henrik Zetterberg Day in Detroit. But I think that many teams are going to look at William Nylander this summer and see a possible high-reward reclamation project and be willing to give up some assets, as long as Toronto is also willing to sweeten the pot on their end. Trevor Daley adds some Cup experience and depth on the backend, Luke Glendening would be a great top nine forward addition that could swap places with Connor Brown at any given moment, and of course, Zetterberg provides some much-needed cap relief. Meanwhile, Detroit gets a decent young defender in Borgman, and another core player in Nylander to add to Larkin, Mantha, etc.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 13, 2017 at 10:03 a.m.
Thread: The Glorious 2017-18 Minnesota Wild (2.0)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MNBassman</b></div><div>That's a big fat NO for the Oiler trade! The Wild want nothing to do with Princess Pouliot...plus, Scandella is worth MUCH more than that.

The Arizona trade is intriguing. My only problem with it is the Wild already have a full cupboard of forward prospects (as do the Coyotes). I like the idea of MacInnis in the Wild's stable though. I do, however, think you need to sweeten the offer from AZ. Get rid of all those 3rd and 4th rounders and make it 2 - 2nds or a 1st. OR...get rid of everyone and offer up Strome or Keller... (I know...)</div></div>

Firstly, the reason the Arizona deal involves so many 3rd's and 4th's is because I actually previously had them separated into two deals, but for the purpose of time saving, i pushed them into one deal. Also, under no circumstances did I even consider Keller or Strome moving for any plausible deal, let alone for an admittedly good stay at home defender and, less desirably, a forward who in three years, everyone will have turned on and begged to be bought out. Secondly, as for the Oilers deal, I did make a mistake while putting that one in, and it has been corrected now, with the deal I intended (Scandella for Pouliot, 2018 2nd, 2017 3rd). The reason for this deal is that the Wild need some bottom six forwards because I don't think guys like Tyler Graovac or Mario Lucia are hugely great options.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 8, 2017 at 9:13 a.m.
Thread: The Glorious 2017-18 St. Louis Blues (2.0)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mikearky</b></div><div>Plus you give a 2nd up and move down in the 2nd round. Sheehan is a RFA after this year where you have 2 years at 4.7 million of Letera. No Thank You</div></div>

I do appreciate your comment because it did make me realize I made an error. I meant to send Detroit's 2018 4th round pick, rather than the 2nd, and I have corrected this mistake. As for the deal itself, I stick by the move because I feel the Red Wings are beginning a rebuild, and this deal gives them two more picks (technically one as they trade one out), one of which being a second rounder. As for the cap concerns, in my Detroit Red Wings armchair GM, there are several more deals which creates enough cap room for this deal. Detroit also has the option to buy out Lehtera if they so desire.
Forum: Expansion DraftMay 31, 2017 at 8:23 a.m.
Thread: The Glorious Vegas Golden Knights (2.0)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rangersandislesfan</b></div><div>Just a question: Why are Lee and Pulock left unprotected?</div></div>

Those were two of the toughest players to leave unprotected that I encountered while putting this team together, so your question is totally worth asking. Firstly, you could either protect Anders Lee or Andrew Ladd, in my opinion, I think it is a toss-up between those two players. However, in reference to Lee, I also think there could be a deal involving Ryan Strome going to Chicago for Marian Hossa and one or two draft picks, so you could also protect Anders Lee if that deal goes through. As for Pulock, there is a player I really like and didn't want to leave unprotected. However, I think that the Islanders want John Tavares to sign and need to show him they're committed to winning right now, and Tavares might view protecting Pulock over an established guy like Boychuk, Leddy, De Haan or Hamonic, he may view it as the team sacrificing some of their ability to win now for a future player.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 29, 2017 at 8:59 a.m.
Thread: The Glorious 2017-18 Anaheim Ducks (2.0)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Lenny7</b></div><div><div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Doug7004</b></div><div>Nice to see an Anaheim fan present a Leafs trade that provides balance to both teams while taking into account each teams restrictions and situation! Good trade for both! Leaf haters frenzy!</div></div>

I don't know...I just see Kapanen and Ritchie as two guys who probably have similar value, but to their current teams. Ritchie plays the heavy hitting/gritty in your face game, whereas Kapanen plays a more skilled game. Switch them from one team to the other and their value drops significantly. To me, it's essentially a washout, that really doesn't help the Ducks.

Then you look at Manson for JVR. Is one year of JVR worth a shutdown dman, who again, plays the Ducks style of hockey? You're adding $3.75 million-ish to the Ducks cap hit. There's no way that Bieksa waives his NMC to go to Boston, so the payroll relief that you get from that deal probably doesn't end up existing. I just don't see it as fit for either team.

It'll likely be a Vatanen move, and I don't imagine that the Leafs will be looking for a RH puck moving dman, as much as they're looking for a RH shutdown guy. Could be wrong though.</div></div>

You do make a fair point about the Bieksa deal, I do realize it is a bit of a stretch, but if he doesn't, you could always look at buying him out, though I think you'd be able to make the numbers work. Additionally, if that deal doesn't go through, you also still have Nicolas Kerdiles, who, if he stays, means you don't need David Desharnais and can remove him the equation. You also wouldn't have Jimmy Hayes and his $2.3 M. As for the bigger deal, the Toronto trade, let me explain my reasoning. Firstly, Anaheim should not be getting JVR as a rental, they should be trading for him and immediately trying to resign him. How you do that is, with JVR likely due for a raise, you take either Bieksa or Hayes' contract and use the money you get from those deals expiring to lock up JVR. He obviously brings something which the Ducks need, a top six established winger who is basically what you're going to wait for several years for Nick Ritchie to blossom into. Josh Manson is a great asset for the Ducks, but Anaheim has a chance to change how their team operates because it needs to change. Every year they have failed to make the Stanley Cup finals and the reason for that is they are playing the wrong style. "Ducks hockey" is fine but it does not win championships nowadays. Need proof? Look at the Stanley Cup finals; the Penguins and Predators are high flying offensive teams. You do need some size and strength but that's why you have JVR, Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, Kase, Cogliano, etc. You have to put more guys like Rakell and Silfverberg around them because that is the way the game is going. I will argue any day of the week that "Ducks hockey" just can't win a championship in a game that is going the way of speed and skill.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 25, 2017 at 9:44 a.m.
Thread: The Glorious 2017-18 New York Islanders (2.0)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Larkinisking</b></div><div>Prince+NYI 2017 1st round pick for 4 years of Zetterberg whom can still put up close to 70 points no way. It would need to be at least Prince+De Haan+NYI 2017 1st round pick for Holland to even sniff trading his captain.</div></div>

While it is true that Zetterberg did put up close to 70 points last season, I would argue that there are things that teams should not pay an overly high price. Firstly, Zetterberg is a few months away from turning 37 years old, so with four years left on his contract with over a $6 Million cap hit, you will likely have, at most, two years left of Zetterberg being a high quality player. Another reason that I don't believe the deal you propose is a good deal is because of Zetterberg's injury history. You couple Zetterberg's age and likeliness to decline in performance over the next two or three years because of that age, his contract which takes him until he's 40-41 years old, and an injury history that isn't exactly unblemished, I can't see anyone being willing to pay more than what I have given, which, in fairness, is a roster player in Prince, as well as a potential replacement if you can nab either Lias Andersson or Elias Petterson at #15.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 15, 2017 at 6:44 p.m.
Thread: The Glorious 2017-18 Vancouver Canucks (2.0)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Anthony2001</b></div><div>Toronto won't accept that trade.......Also signed Horvat for too long and too much</div></div>

I should explain the logic behind the Toronto deal.At first glance, yes, trading a first rounder as a rebuilding club seems like a crazy idea. However, here is why Toronto does the deal. Firstly, Cole Cassels is a guy who can become a third line center, potentially blossoming into a younger version of Leo Komarov if he reaches his potential. However, the main motive here is the two picks, the second specifically. Yes, the Leafs really need some size on the blueline in the top four, which could be filled by Callan Foote or Nic Hague, both of whom I really like, however, I would argue an equal if not bigger need is a long term starting goaltender. Now, I don't think you should use first round picks on netminders, especially if it is higher than 20, as I feel there are better certainties available. However, once you get to the 2nd round and beyond, it's fair game.I would use the 2nd rounder (#33) to select one of the top goalies, whether you like U-P Luukonen, Keith Petruzzelli, Michael DiPietro or Jake Oettinger. Additionally you get a third rounder as a sweetener. This means you fill a need in goal, add two other prospects in Cassels &amp; the third rounder, Also, I think the Leafs will make a deal with the Ducks which involves Kasperi Kapanen, Jamees van Riemsdyk, Josh Manson and Nick Ritchie.

As for Horvat, I believe he is the best player on that team right now and could put up 70+ points but needs a good winger to pass to. I would argue that if you were to give Horvat a high scoring, effective winger that can keep up with him, you'd see not only his stats improve, but his overall play skyrocket, and if evidence for this is needed, I would refer you to watch tapes of him in London with Max Domi and see what he can do with a high speed, high scoring winger. In my opinion, the deal gives them a chance to add a quality prospect, I think in my mock draft, I have the Canucks nabbing center Elias Petterson at #17. However, at fifth overall, if I'm a Canucks fan, maybe Cody Glass or Gabe Vilardi could be considered the overall better player, but I think a better option for Vancouver is Owen Tippett, who, while isn't the two-way force that Glass or Vilardi may be, he may be the best pure sniper available in this draft.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 25, 2017 at 10:21 a.m.