SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Anus_McLeod

Member Since
Apr. 27, 2020
Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
2nd Favourite Team
New York Islanders
Forum Posts
3626
Posts per Day
2.4
Forum: Armchair-GM20 minutes ago
Forum: Armchair-GM2 hours ago
Thread: only realistic Zegras trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>RobbStark003</b></div><div>Thats an extremely minor point. What happened with Mailloux was misreported. Due to the outrage/backlash, he had to make up for behavior that was far beyond what he actually did. He has taken ownership of his mistakes, while not at all arguing any of the misreported facts or shown any amount of defense for himself.

The OHL punished him, he took it.
The NHL punished him, he took it.
The Habs brought him up slowly as to not draw attention, he took it.
He has attended all his off ice training and according to those involved (3rd party) he is turning this mistake into being a better person and a rolemodel for those around him.

Lets be honest here. If he did what he did in North America, none of us even hear about it because he was a minor. But because he was in Sweden, we found out he took a picture of the top of an older girls head, and bra straps, while she performed oral sex, and then told his team about it. Its gross behaviour, but so is reporting it as "rape" as the NHL reporters all dog piled on a 17 year old kid. And misguided fans continue to do to this day.

But Mailloux is not available, so you dont have to worry about it. We arent creating a hole in our RD to get a coaches nightmare in Zegras.</div></div>

I'm all for second chances and agree that it was blown out of proportion, but I also recognize that there is a business aspect that includes reputational risk. There was backlash when he was drafted, and there could be backlash if he were acquired. It needs to be taken into account that organizations will factor that into the equation.

My personal feelings of the matter aside, I very much disagree that it's a minor issue, even if he has been doing the right thing ever since.
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 11:46 a.m.
Thread: A Trade Proposal
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>tm0000</b></div><div>I'd want more than a 4th to take the last five years of that contract off your hands. Wood is a fine player, but the Isles already have a lot of long-term contracts. I don't think it would be smart for them to acquire another one, especially for a bottom-six guy, without some real incentive.</div></div>

I know that there's this perception that Wood has a bad contract, but I very much disagree. He's a quality third line player, his AAV is fine for what he brings (and will look even better in a couple years), and the deal expires when he's still in his early 30s. Cost certainty for a guy like that is nice to have.

That said, I do get your point. Bottom six isn't the biggest need for the Isles. But I do think it's time they pull the rip cord on Wahlstrom, and I figured this was a decent return for him.
Forum: Armchair-GMYesterday at 11:22 a.m.
Thread: A Trade Proposal
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MeetYourMakar</b></div><div>A lot to like in this. I would have Behrens full time in the AHL and if Foudy is going to be in the bottom 6, I'd rather start Ritchie/JLF on the wing and keep some center depth. I am worried JLF will be Jost 2.0 if stuck in the bottom 6. Training camp/pre-season should be fun</div></div>

I don't disagree with anything you say here. I would bet money that Behrens spends time in the AHL, but I thought it was easier to illustrate depth with this lineup.

In terms of the lines, I tried to match skill sets and balance things out. For example, Landeskog with Ritchie is a must, as it would take a lot of pressure off the kid, not just at the dot but with defensive responsibilities as well. Wahlstrom fits as the third piece because he has shown goal scoring ability.

For the fourth line, I like JLF's ability to maintain puck control in transition and distribute to a couple guys who like to drive the net. He won't be the forechecking monster on that line, but I don't think he needs to be.

Of course this is all just theoretical and on paper, but that was my logic for setting it up the way I did. Not sure how it looks if Nuke gets right, but that's a problem I'd love to have.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 22 at 1:48 p.m.
Thread: No Ones Rowdier or More Youthful Than Old Man Burns
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PaddysPub</b></div><div>The Avs traded a second and Drew Helleson for Manson. I have loved that trade. Manson is coming off a career year of 25 points. Also had 7 points in 11 playoff games. I know Manson is getting older, however I think the Avs will get at least the value that they paid for him, in a trade. I'd say he still has positive value. If it's a 3rd and a 4th offered, they'll probably pass.</div></div>

I like Manson, but it's hard for me to love the trade last year when dude played only 27 games. He was obviously much better and much more available this year. His injury history does concern me though, as does relying on him for 20 min per game. Burns has been an iron man and would still be an upgrade, even at his age, imo.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 16 at 2:58 p.m.
Thread: So Much Talent and a Highly Unconventional Deal
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Claesson4Norris</b></div><div>Awful deal for Utah. That late 1st is already not enough for Crouse, and the Strome deal is bad. 5mil until 2027 for a brutal defensive player who doesn't score goals, or create offense at a high level.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>I would love to have Lawson Crouse, who is undervalued by many fans of most teams east of the Mississippi, but I don't think that gets him.</div></div>

I agree that it's bad for Utah, but I'm also hesitant to assign a crazy high value to a guy who doesn't score at a faster clip. If it were me, I'd add more, but I'm not sure how to make the trade better. Utah doesn't need mid picks or mid assets, and I wouldn't trade the 2025 first unless it was highly protected.