SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

emoprettyboy

Member Since
Feb. 27, 2022
Favourite Team
Ottawa Senators
Forum Posts
2313
Posts per Day
2.8
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 3 at 10:02 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Viqsi</b></div><div>Okay, let's analyze this, and why it's a strong indicator of bad-faith reasoning. Why would Jiricek be a prerequisite?

Well, there's the obvious - he's a high-quality RD prospect. It could be that Ottawa also needs high-quality RD. In such a case, the #4OA is quite likely to provide exactly that, depending on who you pick - a high quality RD prospect. Jiricek isn't "better" because he's ready now or something - the guy needs more development time. He will not be fixing problems "now". So you're getting largely the same thing, if that specifically is your goal. Our preference for keeping Jirieck instead of just taking the #4OA ourselves would be mostly because he's already familiar with the organization and the systems here and so that's a bit of a head start - one which he would not have in Ottawa, because Ottawa is not Columbus, so the value proposition isn't there.

Most of the time, however, when someone demands a high-end prospect like that and declares it non-negotiable, it isn't because said prospect fits a need for their team - it's strictly punitive towards the requesting team for daring to ask about Their Beloved Guy. Since you are actively turning down an asset that is equivalent or even potentially <strong>better</strong> in terms of fitting the ostensible need that Jiricek would fit, I am obliged to conclude one of two things.

Either:
1) You have a severe misperception as to how NHL-ready Jiricek presently is and haven't bothered to reseearch further, or
2) You're just being punitive and petty, and doubling down less out of Ottawa's interest and more out of pure vindictive spite.

Which is it?</div></div>

damn you really care about this lmao

anyways it’s not very complicated

Levshunov won’t be there at 4 and I think that Jiricek is both a better prospect and a better fit than taking Parekh at 4, which is obviously what you’re just suggesting.

you’re making things very complicated, did I accidentally hurt your feelings? I apologize if I did, I didn’t mean to :)
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2 at 11:42 p.m.
Thread: Trade values
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Socal_King</b></div><div>No I'd move Byfield and Clarke for certain people so I know they are on the table. It would be hard to move them buy I could find deals. The process here is to find players to play with them. But it seems like there is zero things that can make pull open their minds. Like Ottawa would ask for anything from LA even Kempe+Spence +Danault+10x 1st round picks. Like it's ridiculous that people couldn't come up with anything other than well if Byfield and Clarke aren't available than Tkachuk is not moving. Like there has to be something. I've watched an NFL team trade their whole draft for 1 player. I've seen Gretzky moved but not Brady ****ing Tkachuk.</div></div>

thing is, if the Sens were to trade Tkachuk, they really need to be able to sell how it could potentially be for the better if the team in the very short term. only way that works is trading top talent for top talent. Weber for Subban type stuff.

when I say that the Kings don’t have the assets outside of Byfield and Clarke, it’s more along the lines of there not being much of a trade that’s reasonable for both sides if it doesn’t include those two players. as you say, yeah, sure. Fiala and Danault and Kempe and LA’s 1sts for the next 5 years would get Brady Tkachuk. but LA can’t do that, it’s ridiculous.

teams can’t tear down the rest of their team just to trade for brady tkachuk, and the sens can’t accept anything less than incredibly high value and quality. only way those two things match up is if a brady trade is for these types of guys. Byfield, Nemec, Laf, etc
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2 at 11:35 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2 at 10:22 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2 at 8:59 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2 at 8:53 p.m.
Thread: Brady
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Tjm220</b></div><div>You’re already getting four first round assets in return for Brady, which is more than the Sabres got for a better player in Jack Eichel. If you think that’s gonna be the return prepared to be exceptionally disappointed by whatever happens. Personally, I think it’s more likely that he doesn’t get traded anytime soon. But in two or three years his value could be lower and he may want out, and you’ll be even more disappointed then.</div></div>

eichel was a very different case than brady is right now, and I'm sure you know that. a buffalo/eichel divorce was inevitable and that was known for a very long time. he obviously had the very serious injury issues that required surgery with a non-zero amount of risk. it's not at all the same deal as a completely healthy player where he and the team have expressed no interest in parting ways with each other. the thing you're certainly right about though is that if they trade him in 3 years, then the return they get will be less than what they could get for him if they traded for him now. because yknow, that's how trade value and contracts work. and that's all part of what makes brady have such a high trade value!

like seriously, when is the last time we saw a player traded in a situation where there's nothing significant dragging down their value? no injury concerns, several years left on a very good contract, no issues with a NMC, no major fallout with the team, no trade being demanded.