SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

goldie078

Member Since
Mar. 12, 2017
Forum Posts
493
Posts per Day
0.2
Forum: Armchair-GMOct. 26, 2017 at 11:08 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 15, 2017 at 4:53 p.m.
Thread: PARAYKO RNH TRADE ( 2 OFFERS)
IMO, the second trade suggestion is more than fair. I think of it this way:

- Parayko is pretty much Nurse with 2 extra years of development** (he's two years older). Crazy talk of Parayko being a franchise player is just that: crazy-talk. He's great, but Nurse is trending to be that player in two years. So the Oilers are getting a 24-year-old right-shot Nurse instead of a 22-year-old left-shot Nurse, if that makes sense. Win for the Oilers.
- RNH is a very similar player to Stastny but with 10 years left in the tank vs Stastny's 2 or 3 (they're 7 years apart). RNH represents an immediate upgrade at 1C for the Blues, is under control for 4 years (vs Stastny's 1) at $1M less cap hit per year. Win for the Blues.
- Blues are sending out $12.5M cap and taking $7M in return. They are getting younger players who are under control for longer (Nurse's contract expires next summer, but he's an RFA, vs Stastny who becomes a UFA).
- Nurse will be signing at 1 year behind Parayko in his development (23yo vs 24yo) so he should sign quite a bit cheaper than Parayko: 6 x $3.5M is a good bet if he has a good season this year.

** This is probably a stretch, it appears that Nurse is a lot closer than that. Here are the facts from the 2016-17 season:

Against elites:
Parayko (31% of total ice time) 47.3 CF%, 50.2 DFF%, 45.8 GF%, 1.59 GF/60, 1.88 GA/60
Nurse (24% of total ice time) 47.9 CF%, 47.8 DFF%, 53.8 GF%, 2.66 GF/60, 2.28 GA/60

Totals:
Parayko (1334 minutes) 51.0 CF%, 52.3 DFF%, 54.0 GF%, 2.43 GF/60, 2.07 GA/60
Nurse (662 minutes) 51.1 CF%, 50.7 DFF%, 54.2 GF%, 2.36 GF/60, 1.99 GA/60

Boxcars, 5x5 only (because Nurse didn't get any PP time to pad his stats) expressed in goals-per-60, assists-per-60, points-per-60:
Parayko: 0.00 G/60, 1.08 A/60, 1.08 P/60 (0-24-24 in 1334 minutes)
Nurse: 0.45 G/60, 0.54 A/60, 1.00 P/60 (5-6-11 in 662 minutes)

If it weren't for his injury last year, Nurse might have posted an even better season than he did. As it is, he's closer to Parayko than most here would care to admit. Maybe that deal isn't as fair as I had suggested... maybe St. Louis is the one adding the pick.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 15, 2017 at 12:26 a.m.
Thread: Getting Duchene
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JackBurton</b></div><div>If you're just going to drone on about these supposed studies that exist that evaluate picks, and not post the names of those who have authored them, or tell us where we can see them, you're just blowing hot bullshit up everyone's asses. I would be happy to give your side consideration if you could actually supply me with information that confirms your statements. So far I have seen none.

I don't dislike your team, or your team's players (hell, I rather enjoy watching Anaheim's young D men create havoc), so I have no real dog in this fight outside of a logically constructed argument based on the actual valuation of picks. Show me that, and we'll discuss.</div></div>
It really wasn't a complicated Google Search:
<a href="http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-value-nhl-draft-picks/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Sportsnet</a>
<a href="http://myslu.stlawu.edu/~msch/sports/Schuckers_NHL_Draft.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Schuckers</a>
<a href="https://originalsixanalytics.com/tag/draft-pick-value/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Original Six Analytics</a>
<a href="http://nhlnumbers.com/2016/5/1/is-it-worth-it-to-trade-up-in-the-nhl-draft" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">NHL Numbers</a> This one references both Schuckers and Burtch
So what is the basis for your evaluation?
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 14, 2017 at 8:32 p.m.
Thread: Getting Duchene
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JackBurton</b></div><div>
Your attempted examination of the claim immediately falls apart when you try to e<strong>quate two 2nd rounders to one 1st rounde</strong>r. You cannot examine a claim with factually incorrect information.

You are overly defensive of Lindholm and Vatanen. I am in no way saying they aren't great players, but just because you feel their value is 2 first round picks doesn't make it so. The other NHL GMs would tell you to get bent in a hurry. And Hamonic was roundly considered an overpayment by everyone outside of Calgary. See what i'm getting at?</div></div>

You do Realize there have been multiple studies where they examine and valuate draft pick value right? I'm not pulling this out of no where. The cumulative value of 2 second rounders puts you into the value range of mid to late firsts. Sure, I wouldn't trade a top 10 pick for 2 2nds but why do you think teams trade down in the drafts? The theory is the more draft picks you have the better the chances are that you find solid NHL contributing players. Then values are assigned to draft positions based on the history of those spots and what they typically yield. Obviously the first is better than 2 seconds in that the chance of that 1 pick is greater than either of the 2nds. That is common sense. That being said I don't think you will find many teams willing to give up multiple firsts so they try to make up the value in quantity.

Lets not also forget that the trades where FANS think teams overpaid really has no bearing on the market. These trades actually happened which means that is the market value. Does it mean everyone will pay it? Of course not but you bet your shorts GMs are using them as negotiating points. You 2 are trying to tell me a top 3 D on one of the best defensive teams in the league who plays in every situation and averaged nearly 22 minutes a night last year is either barely or not even worth a 1st rounder. I can also tell you that unless Lindholm is being traded for a top 5 pick+ I wouldn't trade him, because that is the only part of the draft that you can safely assume you'll get a similar level player and then you have to wait for them to develop. I am not sure where the disconnect where trades happen every year where rentals will return Picks plus, and yet we think young cost controlled great players somehow have just slightly more value. Hell Eaves was traded for a conditional 1st after 1 good season at 32 years old. Are we really suggesting that Vatanen or Lindholm with term and cost certainty aren't worth significantly more than a 32 year old injury prone player who has had 1 good year? Or Martin Hanzal who has never broken 50 points? Admittedly the rental market is inflated a bit because of sense teams should go all in to put themselves over the top. But it rarely works. If you consider Eaves contract extension, which wasn't even guaranteed, the Ducks got 3 years of a 32 year old injured player with 1 good year and it cost them a 1st rounder. Also I'm not really sure who said the Hamonic deal was Bad. I Honestly didn't pay that much attention as I am not a fan of either team but I took a glance at the <a href="http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=2362035" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">CGY HF Board</a> about it and it looked like mixed reviews which is generally a sign that it was probably fair.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>awatt</b></div><div>That is a horrible analogy to use. I think you can come up with a better one than that.

Trading Vats helps open up a spot for Larsson. Vats can also help get us a 3rd line center. Yes, Rakell can play center but he is way more lethal on the wing for us. Vats is not worth a 1st, I promise you that, at most maybe a second. Lindholm, Manson, Montour, and Fowler could possible fetch us first round picks but it would be hard to. I love Vats but he is not a shut down d-man. Manson and Lindholm are and that is why it is easier to trade Vats away.

Calgary over paid for Hamonic and we all know that. The asking price for Duchene is different and he impacts the team differently as well. Duchene was top 10 in faceoff %, he is a quick center and could put up 60-70 points on a good team. We are one piece away from being in the finals again and that one piece is someone like Duchene.</div></div>
It is a simple analogy meant to just demonstrate that you don't sell low just because you have excess. The only reason we can move Vatanen is because we have drafted well and have replacements. He is still the 3rd best D on our Team. You don't trade him away to make room for a 20 year old who hasn't proven anything and doesn't have a roster spot. That doesn't make the team better. You only move him if he yields a return that makes the team better. I think Duchene and Montour and Larsson makes us better then Vatanen Montour and Vermette. I also don't want Rakell at center. I would love Duchene on the Ducks and actually think he would be a great fit as he crosses off a lot of boxes that we would want as you have mentioned. My issue is the valuation of our players. I don't know what you're basing their value on honestly. All we have are past trades, and opinions of those trades. History just doesn't support that Vatanen is only worth a second. And for all the Vatanen injury Talk he has never missed more than like 15 games in a single season up until this year which is likely. Sure they're a concern but not any more than they should have been for Hamonic, who againt I admittedly didn't follow that trade but from the little research I did I didn't get the sense that it was viewed overwhelmingly as an over payment, so much as Snow got what he wanted in roughly 2 firsts. Not to mention that Jones is not really interchangeable with the other prospects in our system. He hold significantly more value than a Nattinen or a Roy. I have not issues giving up guys like that. I just don't see why Col would want them. Pettersson is a legit asset IMO and I am totally okay to move him as well. I'm not really against moving any one of the assets you mentioned. I just don't think we need to move them all.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>awatt</b></div><div>If I am not mistaken, Carter requested a trade out of Columbus though. He also never wanted to play for them either and not playing to your potential does not exactly help your value here.

Duchene has not requested for a traded and he seems to want to show up and play hockey and that's all he cares about. Good portion of the teams are trying to get Duchene as well and with that you might have to over pay as well and some times it is worth the rise and others it is not. To me getting Duchene and overpaying a little bit is worth it, if you bring home the cup.</div></div>

As for the Carter comparison, Duchene just came off a season where the whole team admitted that there were attitude issues and Duchene is on record saying he burnt out in January. He is quite obviously disgruntled and wants out. That is clear as day. It actually strikes me as being very similar in Carters situation. Does that mean he doesn't like the guys he plays with? NO. He reported to camp because he is under contract and he's a professional and he will support his teammates.

At this point I don't know what else to say other than I don't grasp where your guy's valuations are coming from. Comparable deals or players, media or otherwise.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 11, 2017 at 2:22 a.m.
Thread: Could b a long year... again
I don't think this team can really be compared to the team that won the division. You're missing 2 high end forwards who are pretty significant 2 way players. Your D actually looks better now with Zadorov IMO but Varly hasn't been able to replicate his Play from that year. It was also pretty widely believed that that particular Avs teams wouldn't be able to replicate that success and they really haven't. If I was Sakic I wouldn't be hoping or expecting that kind of performance again. Especially when all media coverage is pointing to one of your star players wanting out. Look at Drouin, supposedly he and Tampa worked things out and in the end he was still traded. Sakic is going to run the risk of Luongo'ing this deal. It is crappy for all parties but its better to make the trade and move on. Focus on the future because Duchene doesn't have one in Colorado. That is my 2 cents.
Forum: Toronto Maple LeafsSep. 9, 2017 at 11:18 a.m.
Thread: Sorry Leaf Fans. Liljgren thoughts.
I think you guys are being way too critical on what we all may look back upon as simply a tough night! Realize that these rookies had one (1) 35 minute practice prior to the tournament. Nobody expects Liljegren to just step in and grab a spot, but most think he will end up this year starting top 4 Marlies, and QBing the PP.
Pal, highly unfair to question why he was drafted 17th overall, as going into last season, he was easily ranked in the top 3 available prospects and fell only after having a very rough time with Mono. He looked phenominal at the Junior showcase over the summer, for Sweden, and think we should give him more than 15 minutes before we set him on a 5 year path, or declare him a bust. If Leafs believe after the main camp that he likely needs more than a year of development you'll likely see him sent back to Sweden for the year and then back with the Marlies in 18/19. But not after 15 minutes.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 10, 2017 at 10:58 p.m.
Thread: Trades Arizona should do
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ChiHawks34</b></div><div><div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>steveospeak</b></div><div>It makes zero sense for Ari to make that kind of trade for JVR. For a non-contending team (though one heading in the right direction) trading for a player just to sign them to an extension is a waste. They can just sign him next offseason. And even if they miss out on him and have to sign another winger (Neal, Hornqvist, Marchssault, Kane, Perron etc.) it's still better than giving up Strome and a couple 2nd rounders</div></div>

its just a move to get arizona fans excited and invest into the arizona coyotes. which the yotes need to do.</div></div>

Trading the 3rd overall pick from 2 years ago seems like a terrible way to excite their fanbase and want to invest in their team. Just because he hasn't set the world on fire in his first 7 NHL games last year doesn't mean he's a bust. He destroyed the OHL last year, and still has a TON of value and upside. Arizona shouldn't trade him away for a rental.

There are plenty of other moves they could make he further excite their fanbase, ones that wouldn't trade away a potential elite prospect (or if they did trade him away they would get a lot more in return).