villenash

Member Since
May 26, 2019
Favourite Team
Nashville Predators
Birthday
Aug 17, 1992
Forum Posts
2216
Posts per Day
5.04
Forum Threads
136
Forum: Armchair-GM16 hours ago
Forum: Armchair-GM21 hours ago
Forum: Armchair-GM22 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gmgb</b></div><div>I agree with you, but at the same time I hate the Ellis trade for similar reasons. Lots of nice pieces, but none of them are high-end enough to make me want to give up Ellis. They're not exactly the same, because Ellis is a proven asset, and with Puljujärvi his perceived value is tied more to his potential, but still. Maybe Johnsson being in both these proposals is the problem. He's a decent player, but with his salary and term he almost feels like a negative asset, with the flat cap.</div></div>

I agree for the most part. I don't like the Ellis trade at all from a Nashville perspective.

But honestly, Johnsson + Bonino would give them a pretty solid top 9. They get some depth that they desperately need in Bonino and Johnsson and they lose a non-roster player and Larsson who is already seeing diminished ice time and not a very good player anyway. The added cap is only about $1.4m with the retention to Bonino. And after next season, Bonino comes off the books or resigns for less than his current AAV. Not saying that this is the deal that gets both players to EDM, but Bonino and Johnsson seem to get traded a lot on this site. So if EDM manages to get them via trade, they could end up with a solid top 9 next year.

X (Athanasiou?) - McDavid - Kassian
Nuge - Drai - Yamamoto
Johnsson - Bonino - X (Ennis/Archibald?)

That would be a pretty solid top 9 with with two of Athanasiou/Ennis/Neal/Archibald filling out the X's most likely.
Forum: Armchair-GMThu at 2:43 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>I mention that in the description. I don't agree with the price either. More to demonstrate that Edmonton can afford to move him.



Nashville has about $4M of cap without moving one of those 3 guys. I'm saying the money to afford a general roster upgrade comes from moving one of the redundant centers: Nashville can afford to do both, not one or the other.

Your logic is flawed: if Chiasson produces on the power play because the Edmonton power play has skilled players on it, he won't produce on Nashville's power play because ...? The argument of "but McDavid and Draisaitl, ugh" is babysh*t in respect to a power play unless Nashville really is made up of 23 bums. I'll give it to you at 5v5, but Chiasson spent most of his time as a 4th liner away from McDavid and Draisaitl this season. He still had a 6-goal and 6-assist even-strength pace. The man produces when he's put in a position to get his big Montrealer ass in front of the net. That's a quintessential power play role. Is he expensive? A bit, sure, but it's already well established that affordability isn't an issue. He's the kind of upgrade a team really looking to win makes.

The only way the Predators wouldn't look to add Chiasson is if they didn't think they were capable of winning.</div></div>

Those are awful 5v5 numbers. And he's only getting PP points because he is playing with the best player in the world -- it just the truth whether you like it or not. Do you really think he would produce on the PP2 unit? What happened to Neal once he stopped playing on the 1st PP unit?? He stopped scoring goals because he wasn't playing with the top players anymore. McDavid got Chiasson a nice contract and then they dumped him on the 4th line. He did the same for Kassian too -- and look where you put Kassian in your lineup... They're 4th liners that get to play with McDavid, and he inflates their numbers.

But it sounds like you've given up on next season though -- I mean, the only reason you would trade him is if you think your incapable of winning, right? Peddle Chiasson to another team.
Forum: Armchair-GMThu at 2:13 pm