SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

WranglerWranglin

Member Since
Dec. 2, 2022
Favourite Team
Calgary Flames
Forum Posts
967
Posts per Day
1.9
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 28 at 3:52 p.m.
Thread: Deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>WranglerWranglin</b></div><div>I think Hanifin is a good target for Vegas with Martinez departing but maybe they take a run in the off season. The closer we get to the deadline the less optimistic I am about Tanev and a 1st. I think they Flames target a guy to slide into the roster right away and maybe a lower pick. I hope you're right though.</div></div>

I don't see much reason to lose hope on that. Contenders are the ones who get desperate, and this years draft being "less strong" will make teams more willing to spend 1sts. On top of that the market is pretty dry in terms of quality to add, especially on the blue line. I'm pretty skeptical of Calgary trading Markstrom but I'm confident we will get a strong return for Hanifin as well as probably a 1st for Tanev.

As for Vegas, yes they may lose Martinez this summer but you are asking them to trade another one of their top 6 defensemen out in this deal. I would say its more likely they just let Martinez go so they can keep both Marchessault and Stephenson, then just move Theodore back to his natural side and promote Korczek to a full time NHL role.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 27 at 2:14 p.m.
Thread: hockey men love provorov
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>WranglerWranglin</b></div><div>Average age of the Sharks D without Vlasic is like 24-25, why would they bring in Ceci to back log the young kids when they're not really looking to win games? Ceci isn't really the guy that I would want mentoring young D men either. Moving Ceci benefits Edmonton more than any team acquiring him.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JuanDamienNebraska</b></div><div>SJ isn’t really in the business of paying for upgrades. If an upgrade on their current players comes for free in a deal, or with a pick as a cap dump, then I’m sure they’d be happy to take it, but they should strictly be trading their rentals for future assets.

As for your suggestion that they could flip Ceci for a pick.. why would they go through the extra step toward acquiring a pick just to help EDM? They can just get a pick for Duclair.</div></div>

Agree with both and on top of this we waste our last retention spot for a guy we hope we can flip for a pick as good as the one we could get flipping Duclair 50% retained. And I’d take Rutta or Embersom over Ceci any day
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 21 at 5:41 p.m.
Thread: 24TDL
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>WranglerWranglin</b></div><div>You could argue really really easily that Neimela's value isn't far off from a 2nd. Hence the Flames taking money back. I don't know anyone out there moving more than that for Neimela. Tough to say middle of the pack rental when he's on the top 3 - 5 of most analysts trade boards.</div></div>

Fair. But essentially if Niemela = 2nd rounder then the trade here is a 2nd and a 3rd for Tanev. I didn't even notice Reaves was in the deal tbh. Makes more sense for CGY to just retain.

You're right though that I'm sure the Leafs and Leafs fans value their own prospects more than others. I think thats pretty normal for any fanbase.

Ultimately I don't think Leafs would do Niemela and a 3rd. I also think that would be a pretty good return for Tanev personally.
Thats why I intially replied as you said it was a bad return
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 20 at 3:33 p.m.
Thread: Is This Enough
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>WranglerWranglin</b></div><div>Prospect would certainly need to be better if they were to retain but getting full pop off the books, bringing in a goalie to work in the rotation for less term and getting pick that could be between 15 and 20 is not a terrible scenario. As I mentioned, I agree that the Flames have no real reason to make the deal without being blown away by the return.</div></div>

Yeah I just don't see much value to getting Markstrom's contract off the books, it's not like we are going to anywhere near the cap ceiling next year. VV having 1 less year of term also doesn't help us open a spot for Wolf any sooner than it does having Markstrom here. Either way we need to ship out Vladar. Clarke isn't a particularly good prospect either, comparable to Schwindt, but a least he plays center. Lastly Markstrom would make them a contender and probably put their 1st in the 20-28 range at the least
Forum: NHL TradesJan. 31 at 10:18 p.m.
Thread: (CGY/VAN) - Lindholm for Kuzmenko, Brzustewicz, Jurmo, 2024 1st (VAN), 2024 4th (VAN)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>WranglerWranglin</b></div><div>I think you’re underselling Lindholm’s surroundings. He has to play against the other teams best every night with no support on his wings. The Canucks will have Lindholm is sweet heart matchups and he will guaranteed have a better second half than he has first half. I think the Flames got a really really good deal but I think the Canucks just significantly improved their line up as well.</div></div>

Yeah, I'm mostly pissed about losing HB. He's a great prospect to have and was a steal for us in the draft. Just a really tough pill to swallow. Lindholm is OK, but if he can't drive play himself and struggles against the league's best, he does not warrant this return.