SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

jayjenkins

FlyersFAN
Member Since
Mar. 6, 2018
Favourite Team
Philadelphia Flyers
2nd Favourite Team
Vegas Golden Knights
Forum Posts
182
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 30, 2018 at 1:57 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 15, 2018 at 10:57 p.m.
Thread: cup contenders?
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jayjenkins</b></div><div>I appreciate you changing the lines to a more realistic approach. Weal wont be 3rd line C but since Hextall has expressed interest in keeping Filpulla around for at least another year, then he could be 3rd line C until any of the C prospects are ready to make the jump (Frost, Rubtsov, Vorobyov, Vecchione)
Also, as much as I want him back in the orange and black and regret the Luke Schenn trade, signing JVR doesn't seem smart short or long term in this setup. A healthy Simmonds is a 30 goal scorer and belongs on the 2nd line at the lowest. He had so many bad injuries this past year, only missed 7 games and still had over 20 goals. He should be 2nd line and Lindblom should be 3rd line for development. If you like Weal enough to keep him on the roster (I don't and would want a bigger physical presence in bottom 6 but its personal preference) then he could be 4th line LW if JVR isn't signed. Seems like a solid lineup to me.
Also, I didn't mention it before and didn't see it in any above comments but I applaud you for the Neuvirth trade to open up a spot for Lyon. Hart is the definite starter in the AHL so Lyon wouldn't get nearly the amount of starts he got this year. With his impressive performance in the AHL playoffs, solid play in NHL play, and praise from Hextall about his consistency, this seems like a realistic option. Well done</div></div>

I appreciate your response. I know the JVR signing isn't realistic at this point for the flyers, but i was sort of going for a more aggressive approach that the flyers could take to compete for a cup next season. And while I agree that Simmonds is better than a third liner, I think it could be beneficial for him to face lesser competition and help facilitate a bounce back year for him. As for Weal, I think he is better than the player that we saw last year, but maybe a bigger and more physical player would be better for the flyers
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 13, 2018 at 2:03 p.m.
Thread: Feedback? (Trades w/ CAR, CBJ, PIT, MIN)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jayjenkins</b></div><div>Personally I think that Hanifin and Reinhart are worth more money. Overall I like this setup. I don't think you would have to retain any of ROR's contract in that deal because of how much you're giving CAR. I also think that you would have to give up more for Hagelin and Sheary and can get more in return for Nylander. You stated that Ennis is just a cap dump, so it's essentially Coyle for Nylander. MIN will take that all day. Nylander, while starting slow, still has a high ceiling. Use that potential to your advantage in that trade by either getting more in return, or trading him to a team that could give you a legit goalie to build around. Personally, I don't see a reason to trade Nylander but if you want to I would want a goalie in return as the forward and D depth you depicted looks really good. Maybe a Nylander for Korpisalo trade? CBJ have one year left on Bob and Korp so they will ahve to make a decision. Trading Nylander for him would make that an easy one for them imo.
Dahlin Hanifin would be a nasty pairing but realistically I see it being Dahlin Ristolainen, then probably Hanifin Bogo on the second pair, leaving Scandella Guhle as the 3rd pairing. That's just a personal preference. Overall nice setup</div></div>

Five stars for trading O'Reilly
That is an over payment even though the Sabres are getting 2 really good players back. The 1st is always nice to have, O'Reilly =&lt; Hanifin and Teräväinen, T &lt;&lt; McCabe, J. + 2019 1st round pick (SJS) + Rights to Lehner
Very thoughtful comments. I do not agree but you provide rational, well developed and reasonable feed back.
I am not a Sheary fan, 12 assists when 65% of his ice time was with Kessel or Crosby, a chair may do as well.
IMO it is too early to trade Nylander (I only recently changed my opinion). He did well in his last 30 AHL games and really well in the tournament.
I will need to add you to my very short list of CF GM's reasonable comments.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 9, 2018 at 3:07 p.m.
Thread: WHO wants lasagna
The Beagle contract's an issue for me. 3 million could probably fetch Tomas Plekanec, who's better, and you wouldn't have to give him term, allowing more flexibility when dealing with Tkachuk and Henrique's next contracts.
Grabner's also gonna run you more like 5-6 million IMO, the guy nearly scored 30 last year. (I am aware that Matt Cane has him under 4 million. I think his model underrates how valuable goals are for UFas relative to points.)
Grabner should also probably be swapped with Ferland, he scored 27G with a much worse situation than Ferland's (while Ferand potted 20)

That said, this is easily the best CGY lineup I've seen on Capfriendly, if only because you kept the 3M line together. The trades make sense and the teams big issue (the third line) has been fixed. Nice job!
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 6, 2018 at 3:40 p.m.
Thread: Caps trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jayjenkins</b></div><div>I respect the balls it takes to propose a trade like this. Props to you. I would counter that you could get more for JT since he is so elite and signed for 8 years. Although bringing in Carlson and Grubauer (I would want Samsonov more but whatever) looks great for the NYI roster, why would WSH want to get JT with Kuznetsov and Backstrom being their top centers. I don't think WSH wants to put either guy on the wing to make room for JT.
I like the idea of signing and trading JT but don't think WSH would be the best fit despite their ability to give you Carlson and a promising goalie</div></div>

Yeah. The Caps don't need Tavares, but I don't think either team wants to end up with nothing. If you think I'm thinking too much about what the Isles need in order to win some hockey games, and not enough about what's in it for the team I've rooted for, for the last few decades?

I'll take it. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gi4tOrKphw" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gi4tOrKphw</a>
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 26, 2018 at 11:42 p.m.
Thread: PATRICK KANE TRADE
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rladda</b></div><div>This would be a 5 star if Carolina had the 20th overall pick or something in that range. But the third overall pick could become someone like the next Patrick Kane so trading that + more for Patrick Kane wouldn’t be smart.</div></div>
If it was easy for someone, even a top 2 pick, to become the next Patrick Kane, wouldn't they have already done it? Picking up a player like Kane right now for Carolina would mean they wouldn't necessarily need another center because Kane is used to playing with lesser centers and would be the driving force on his line regardless (the Hawks didn't have a 2C of merit for all 3 of their cups). If Carolina thought their absolute best chance at a cup was next season, having Kane would be better than almost any first year player in recent selection (outside of McDavid/Matthews types). The issue with this is not the inclusion of the #2 pick imo but that Carolina wouldn't give up both Hanifin and Bean - they're deep on defense but not so deep they could lose two young guys like that.

Not that it matters - the Hawks wouldn't move Kane and Kane wouldn't likely waive his NMC to go to Carolina.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 25, 2018 at 1:30 p.m.
Thread: Adding Depth, Seabrook trade
I'm going to stop even looking at "Armchair-GM" rosters with a Seabrook trade in them. I'm a Blackhawks fan and Seabrook's contract is toxic and untradeable. It's time to accept that. Seabrook is not going to approve a trade to a non-Cup contending/rebuilding team and those are the teams that MIGHT consider taking him along with a couple prospects and/or some retained salary to make the cap floor but his contract is just way too long to be practical for even a rebuilding team to take on. He's signed 6 more years - longer than Toews, Kane, and Keith! The term was a HUGE mistake - it should have been a 6 year, $6m a year deal maximum or they should have let him leave as a UFA. Seabrook is going to be on the Blackhawks roster and count against the cap for them until one of the following 4 things happen: He's demoted to the AHL and clears waivers and chooses to retire (some of his contract will still count against the cap if he plays in the AHL), he retires from the NHL before his contract is over, he sustains an injury that puts him on the LTIR for the rest of his career, or another owners' lock out results in another compliance buyout (or two) being added to the cap structure and the Blackhawks use it on Seabrook (even then some of his contract would count against the cap). I saw one hockey analyst speculate that the Blackhawks might be able to make an attractive offer to the Seattle expansion team with some prospects to take Seabrook but I don't think that'll happen or that Seabrook would approve it plus players with a NMC have to be protected under the expansion draft rules.