SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

gmgb

Member Since
Jun. 22, 2017
Favourite Team
Nashville Predators
Forum Posts
7660
Posts per Day
3.1
Forum: Armchair-GMWed. at 2:54 p.m.
Thread: Draft and next season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Smitty426</b></div><div>Back out all of the extras and 10th OA for Y.A. I saw what you said but the guy has 3 NHL games and 48 AHL games played. And yes you're going on what he <strong>might</strong> be but there is no history that says he's going to be Shesty or Vasy. Sure you want an add to feel like the guy you develop has more value, we can do that. Its just not a Holtz, Mercer type player. I know what the reply will be, but hey a 10th OA is not worth nothing.</div></div>

No, obviously 10OA isn't nothing. Is it not less of a sure thing than Askarov though? There's no telling who'll be available at that spot, and how whoever gets picked at that spot develops is a bigger unknown than Askarov is now.

Like <a href="/users/herzausstein" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@herzausstein</a>, I think NSH should move on from Saros and keep Askarov. I'm not interested in this proposal overall (even though I'd love to have Casey), so maybe I'm biased. I do think the value is considerably tilted in NJ's favour though.
Forum: Armchair-GMWed. at 11:05 a.m.
Thread: I have THE trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CaseyFlyman</b></div><div>I would think it's 100% contingent on Marner signing a (reasonable) extension, and Nashville banking on extending a window with Askarov and Marner. Next year wouldn't be an all-in push, per se, but within a few years I'd assume you're contending with a core of Marner, Askarov, Josi, Forsberg, Kemell, etc. Unlikely, though. And I agree: I don't see a scenario where you'd go all-in next year by <em>trading </em>Saros.



Mostly agree here, and I'm not familiar enough with Nashville to know what's in the pipeline and how likely they are to pan out. I will say, from a Columbus fan: Nyquist is great, but...I highly doubt a 34-year-old career middle-sixer having a "breakout" year is sustainable. He's probably a solid 40-50 point middle-six winger for a few more years, even though I hope he proves this year was the new norm.</div></div>

What is a reasonable extension for Marner though? He's already making the uppermost limit of what I think he should be getting. Aside from not having to give up anything to get him, Reinhart should come in at a lower cap hit (despite being the one coming off a 50+ goal season). $10M looks a lot better to a guy who was making $6.5M, than to someone who was making almost $11M.

Aside from Askarov and Molendyk, almost all of NSH's best prospects are wingers (predominately RWs). Their biggest needs are a top center (good depth in the system, but no one with #1 C potential) and RDs.

I wasn't looking at Nyquist as a long term solution, or considering extending him past next season. Just that NSH is covered for the 1st line RW spot already, for the remainder of Marner's current contract. Gus' chemistry with Forsberg and O'Reilly has been an unexpected surprise. Seems like a good dude, too. As a fan it's always nice to have guys you want to root for on your team.
Forum: Armchair-GMWed. at 10:02 a.m.
Thread: Offseason plans
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CM_Insane</b></div><div>True they may be cheaper but with the kids coming up for them they may prefer a better defensive player for Fabbro who wasn't playing until an injury. Van could add to them was just base off possible deal.</div></div>

NSH has multiple forwards in the A that are either NHL ready, or on the cusp of being so. Can't say the same about their current RD prospects. NSH will have more holes to fill on RD too, with Barrie (and possibly Carrier) not returning.

It's been a bit perplexing why Brunette scratched Fabbro so much, but he plays well with Josi. A guy who can play on the top defense pair is a lot more useful than a $4.75M depth forward, IMO. Especially when NSH already has several vet defensive forwards in the mix (Sissons, McGrattan, Smith, Jankowski).
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 9:58 p.m.
Thread: Another Marner Deal
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NucksnOilers</b></div><div>Is it? Saros is most likely gone in free agency next year anyways unless the Preds want to pay him 7-8 million long-term to play with Askarov, as I've discussed with other Pred fans recently Tomasino is the odd man out in their future top 6, Carrier is hitting free agency anyways. The 1st and 2nd obviously hurt to lose for a young team but what are the odds either of those players become as good as Marner</div></div>

Yeah it is. Giving up that much for a year of Marner is insane. Diminishing Saros and Carrier as lost to UFA feels ungenerous. Either/both guys could be re-signed. With a year remaining, Saros could be traded for a healthy return that makes more sense than an expensive rental, at a position that isn't a big need (it's not like there's any guarantee Marner re-signs with NSH - if that were even a move that NSH should entertain).

Even at a much more reasonable price, I'm against a Marner trade. I just elaborated on this in a different thread, so I'm just going to paste my thoughts about that here, instead of re-writing it all out again:

If NSH wanted to go all in for next season, and saw Marner as the rental they needed to do that, it doesn't make sense for them to trade Saros for him. As talented as Askarov is, he just doesn't have the NHL experience yet to be the guy you bank on in that scenario.

Trading for Marner and re-signing him doesn't make a lot of sense for NSH either. RW isn't a big enough need. Nyquist was a top 40 scorer this year, for a fraction of what Marner makes. Evangelista is coming into his own as a top six RW. There's great depth at the position coming up too (Kemell, Tomasino, Wood, Kiiskinen). NSH has bigger needs that Marner doesn't address.

Even if NSH did want to add a top line RW, meeting whatever price TOR wants for Marner wouldn't be my first move. I'd look at signing a UFA like Reinhart first. He's a better goal scorer, could come at a lower cap hit, and wouldn't cost any assets.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 7:48 p.m.
Thread: I have THE trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>AEcho</b></div><div>On way it works in my head for NSH is if Marner agrees to sign an identical deal to Forsberg, which I doubt happens.</div></div>

Yeah, I don't think Marner taking a pay cut is very likely. Even getting him to re-sign for what he currently makes seems like a pipe dream.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CaseyFlyman</b></div><div>I have no horse in this race, but this doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility. Props to you for that, and for getting creative.

If Nashville does want to move Saros, I could see Toronto making a Marner-Saros swap (with picks/prospects to adjust). Woll is a great backup to the first true 1A goalie Toronto has had in a while. Entirely dependent on Nashville wanting Marner, though, but I could see a team 10th in GF/G, 16th on PP%, and with a RW depth of Nyquist, Beau, Evangelista, and Smith being interested in an upgrade.</div></div>

If NSH wanted to go all in for next season, and saw Marner as the rental they needed to do that, it doesn't make sense for them to trade Saros for him. As talented as Askarov is, he just doesn't have the NHL experience yet to be the guy you bank on in that scenario.

Trading for Marner and re-signing him doesn't make a lot of sense for NSH either. RW isn't a big enough need. Nyquist was a top 40 scorer this year, for a fraction of what Marner makes. Evangelista is coming into his own as a top six RW. There's great depth at the position coming up too (Kemell, Tomasino, Wood, Kiiskinen). NSH has bigger needs that Marner doesn't address.

Even if NSH did want to add a top line RW, meeting whatever price TOR wants for Marner wouldn't be my first move. I'd look at signing a UFA like Reinhart first. He's a better goal scorer, could come at a lower cap hit, and wouldn't cost any assets.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 4:55 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 4:51 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 12:02 a.m.