SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

UpsideDownQue

Member Since
Aug. 11, 2017
Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
Forum Posts
8440
Posts per Day
3.4
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 6 at 6:41 p.m.
Thread: Filling Holes - Bellemare Nedeljkovic Reilly
We thought we'd never see it again...

but "Mike Reilly for a 3rd" trades are <em><strong>BACK</strong></em>, baby!!

Isles accept, I would think. Aho or Bolduc can just get sheltered in that LD3 slot, or they can bring in another 6/7th type for a late round pick.

Ned at 3rd round value feels a little spicy - I don't think there are many legit contenders looking for goalie help (out of the teams currently in playoff position, I think maybe the Flyers, Kings or Leafs would be looking but that's it - in the east, Boston/Tampa/Florida/NYR/Canes are set, and the Wings probably wouldn't be itching to bring Ned back in; out west, Dallas/Winnipeg/Nashville/Vegas/Vancouver are set, &amp; Edmonton doesn't have the space) so you might be able to push down to a 4th here, maybe throw conditions on it that turn it into a 3rd if Ned plays 50.1% of the playoffs or something like that.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 26 at 8:41 p.m.
Thread: Three 3Cs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>UpsideDownQue</b></div><div>Assuming you mean Kerfoot I could get on board with that but it would mean they would likely have to run a 21 man roster to make it work. Moving Kerfoot at 1.75 and replacing him with a league minimum deal would save roughly 1M, while moving Manson at 4.5M and replacing him with a 2-3M contract would save 1.5-2.5M, allowing them to use a 22 or 23 man roster

If you mean Colton I would disagree. I would much rather keep Colton than Manson</div></div>

Oh ofc no. We keep Colton for good. He'll be a fine 2C someday. I meant either one of the Arizona guys. Looking at the cap, probably Kerfoot.

And if it did come down to trading a D, I'd actually sooner trade Girard than Manson. I'm not one of those fans that hates him. Just think it'd be better that way.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 20 at 7:26 a.m.
Thread: An argument supporting Monahans value
I think your argument comes up lacking in light of two details: 1.) it's based solely on offensive production meaning it comes up short when you try to compare him to Bergeron or even Compher (not saying Monahan is useless defensively, just that he isn't a <strong>particularly</strong> strong two-way C) and 2.) Monahan plays almost exclusively on PP1, which is something he wouldn't do on most contending teams (further hurting your argument based on offensive production). You may have more dimensions you could use to support your belief but, as it's laid out here, it's lacking.

I'm not saying it's impossible that he returns a 1st but I know that's a price I wouldn't pay- in general or for my team (EDM). If a team does, I imagine it'll be conditional based on that team reaching the conf. finals.