SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

slamdunk

Member Since
Jun. 18, 2015
Favourite Team
Ottawa Senators
2nd Favourite Team
Los Angeles Kings
Forum Posts
312
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 12, 2018 at 3:42 p.m.
Thread: Kovy
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Subbanator7667</b></div><div>Ya but if I’m trading away a 24 year old 50 point winger for a ‘big center’ I’m at least aiming for a guy who has played center in the NHL and is proven to be successful there. Bjugstad has spent a lot of time the past two years on the wing, not trading a top 6 forward for a third line center, MTL has those already.

I’ll also say that Galchenyuks defensive liabilities have been over exaggerated. He has massively improved under Claude and it showed in the last half of last year.</div></div>

Bjugstad's most productive season was on center in 14-15, he's been on the wing because of Barkov and Trochek, I'm reluctant to believe that Galchenyuk can land you a good center elsewhere. Any other guy you trade him for will be a 2C and we all know what gamble Berg took last year. He traded Sergachev for Drouin with the hopes that he would be the teams top center, how has that worked out? Point is no matter who you trade Galchy for you will not get a 1C unless you're moving a high pick with it as well. Only available first line center out there is John Tavares and I doubt he signs in Montreal. Also you are not going to draft a number 1 center with the 3rd overall pick this yr either. Only other guy I can think of is Tyler Johnson but he's small. I'm basing this scenario off of with the stigma that Montreal has always been searching for a big center. For arguments sake we can take out the second and third round picks.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 12, 2018 at 3:27 p.m.
Thread: Kovy
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Subbanator7667</b></div><div>The cost of a big center is a player that’s two years younger and has out produced him? I don’t think so. Montreal laughs at this trade. They wouldn’t give you Galchenyuk for Bjugstad and McGinn , let alone adding in another two picks</div></div>

You can make the same argument about a Hall for Larsson trade it still happened because the cost of a RHD, face it Galchenyuk is not a true center and has mostly been productive on the wing another thing to consider is the lack of 2 way game possessed by Galchenyuk, the only thing you are equating here is offensive output. You can continue your search for a big center all you want you're going to end up paying some guy what the Star paid for Hanzal and then regret it after. Big centerman aren't an easy get.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 12, 2018 at 10:22 a.m.
Thread: Busy Summer
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Rcsherwo</b></div><div>I like the BUF and STL trades alot......but I just don't understand the CHI trade. Why would we give up Faulk for two cap dumps in guys who may never play hockey again? I dont think getting a 1st back and giving up a second makes that worth it at all.</div></div>

Well Faulk is up in two years and so is Crawford, I don't think Crawford would be a cap dump but I can see as to why you would want more value. I just think Faulk is overrated in some regards but because not many people watch Carolina he's automatically the name that gets brought up as being their best or second best dman since he's relatively young but experienced and is a right shot. Also you can put Hossa's contract on LTIR save cap space and pay him less than you would pay Darling, just the number on paper looks larger but Carolina saves money in this deal too
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 7, 2018 at 4:48 p.m.
Thread: Moving O'Reilly etc.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Vanderm</b></div><div>CGY has a lot of young potential studs coming up on defense that deserve a shot at earning a spot. Andersson has already proven he's ready. Kulak has earned his spot on the left side. Valimaki and Kylington will get a long look this year. So, since CGY can't launch two of their Top 5 dmen this summer (and by "can't", I mean "Treliving probably won't, but who knows"), adding Beaulieu is likely not a value-add to CGY.</div></div>

Yes I also agree with you on that to an extent as I don't think Kylington is ready for NHL duty and just optically I don't think they're ok with integrating 3 rookies in one season to their d core, I feel like they'll call some up and send the others down during various times as a means to get them prepared for the year after. I just think Calgary is making a push to contend and I just don't see how they bring in 3 rookies and Kulak (sophmore). Besides Nathan could just be flipped if the youth plays well anyways I was including mostly in terms of value to even out the trade
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 7, 2018 at 4:35 p.m.
Thread: Moving O'Reilly etc.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Vanderm</b></div><div>I get why you did that (re: Brouwer). But I feel strongly that Treliving would require a player upgrade PLUS BUF eating Brouwer's contract (and/or moving it) to get the Hamilton conversation going. As good as O'Reilly is, CGY has Monahan and Backlund as a bonafide Top 2 C pairing, with Jankowski coming along. So in terms of situational needs, BUF needs a Hamilton-type player more than CGY needs an O'Reilly-type player....plus the contract $ differential....plus the age differential, etc. When you pull all that together, Treliving is going to ask BUF for quite a bit, if they are really talking about this type of deal.</div></div>

Well I added Beaulieu who is a 4/5 guy, I think he'd do well in Calgary and don't forget they also have Stone and Hamonic on the right side still. I agree with you to an extent but I'm not sure Buffalo will part with Reinhart for this deal I feel like they're even moving O'Reilly in an effort to maybe shift Max to centre. Maybe Buffalo can throw in Ullmark in the deal or another prospect but don't expect it to be Middlestadt
Forum: Armchair-GMJul. 19, 2017 at 11:27 a.m.
Thread: What I would do
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Caletti12</b></div><div>At this point, I would say Hamilton is more valuable than Duchene. Duchene grades out as a good #2 Center whereas Hamilton grades out as a #1 Defenseman. Hamilton is also on a great contract, is 2 years younger than Duchene, and had more points last season (50) as a defenseman than Duchene (41) as a center. Hamilton is just starting to emerge as a potential elite defenseman in the league, and made up the best pairing in the NHL statistically last season with Mark Giordano. I can't see Calgary trading him, especially with their depth at Center already with Monahan, Backlund, Bennett and Stajan.</div></div>

Calgary already had good D depth and just got Hamonic to begin with. I agree on your assessment on Duchene, but disagree with you on your assessment of Hamilton, also Brodie is a left shot who's comfortable on the right side as well.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2, 2017 at 1:22 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMJun. 2, 2017 at 1:17 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 31, 2017 at 2:51 p.m.
Thread: After Expansion
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>wabit</b></div><div>Why does Vegas take Haula? The Wild have so many better options to choose from.
Why does EDM make the Pommer trade?
Pommer+2nd+3rd for a 4th is essentially what the Wild are paying to get rid of a decent but $1.5m overpayed player. Bad deal for the Wild, retain some salary and he should be movable for a decent return.
I want nothing to do with even a half priced Niemi. Dallas would be better off just buying him out and keep their pick.
Do the Wild at least get some lube to go with the Tor and NJD trades?</div></div>

- Pommer got 47 points last yr vs pouliot who got 20 and they both have 2 yrs remaining
- Buying out Niemi results in a cap hit next yr as well
- Haula is Vegas' best option in this case wth do you think the wild in this case made all these deals, so they avoid losing better pieces without any return