SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

westleysnipez

westleysnipez
Member Since
Jun. 9, 2022
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
2nd Favourite Team
Seattle Kraken
Forum Posts
1384
Posts per Day
1.9
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 1 at 8:35 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 1 at 11:30 a.m.
Thread: Jiricek
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 31 at 1:56 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>Really? Kuz is literally 6th on the team in ATOI and Per Friedman "No question they're looking for a top 6 forward". So VAN believes Kuz shouldn't be 6th or higher in ATOI. That's just 1 quote and math. Sure he goes on to say a position/player than can move around the lineup. No doubt about it, but that doesn't mean VAN isn't trying to move his contract to actually get a top 6 forward.

For the record. I wouldn't mind acquiring Kuz at all! Just has to be for the right price. Hawks aren't in a position to be sending picks away. Like zero 1st and zero 2nds. AWFUL move for the Hawks if EITHER a 1st or 2nd gets moved. But something reasonable...ok. Another post just had the OTT 3rd and Teply. I can yield to that. fine. middle 3rd and an ECHLer.</div></div>

Kuzmenko is a Top-6 forward, but he can't play centre. The Canucks have a gluttony of talented wingers (8 forwards on pace for 20+ goals) and need a reliable 2C so Petey can play on the Lotto line. Kuzmenko is the one teams have been calling about (Chicago and Nashville the most) more than any other player. The idea behind moving Kuzmenko is to earn futures for that reliable 2C because Allvin and Rutherford have explicitly said they don't want to trade away the top prospects. Many fans think a 1st + Kuzmenko is the answer, but teams like Calgary, Pittsburgh, or Anaheim don't want Kuzmenko because he doesn't fit their ask (futures). Moving Kuzmenko to a team looking for scoring assistance (like Chicago or Nashville) that earns the futures we can flip to those teams. Either VAN moves Kuzmenko to a team like CHI for futures and then flips those futures for a 2C (Lindholm, Vatrano, Henrique) or for a lethal first line winger to replace Petey on the 1st line (Guentzel).
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 31 at 1:42 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>That's not ME putting the emphasis on the Have. That's a quote from Friedman. You are the one saying Friedman is the gospel. You are the one putting in all the quotes. So fine, I'm all for playing by YOUR rules, BUT if we're quoting Friedman...then we going to quote all of it. Not just picking/choosing the parts that best suit you.

"The Canucks have repeatedly said they're not wanting to move Kuzmenko unless it makes sense. " Now this quote is from you...and you're the one making assumptions on what makes sense. How about you just trade Kuz for Bedard. Does that make sense to you? Of course VAN is going to want to maximize value, but if were believing Friedman...Kuz is not a top 6 forward. So why in the world are the Hawks sending a st and a 2nd for a $5M bottom 6 forward.</div></div>

I've not said that Friedman is gospel, I said he's one of the most trusted insiders. You put the have in caps and bold. That's not how he phrased it. I didn't pick and choose the quotes or emphasis certain parts, I included all pieces where he talked about Kuzmenko and Chicago.

Yes, I wrote that, based on interviews with Allvin and Rutherford about Kuzmenko.

Obviously, Kuzmenko is not worth Bedard, Asking for a late 1st + late 2nd for a 30+ goal scorer on a down year whose signed for 1.5 seasons isn't a ridiculous ask. Lindholm is having a down year and is still commanding a 1st + top prospect.

What do you mean "if we're believing Friedman... Kuz is not a top 6 forward." He specifically mentions "Kuzmenko is a [30 goal scorer], he can score, we know he can score." Friedman wouldn't have said that if Kuzmenko wasn't a Top-6 forward.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 31 at 1:20 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>Well let's be careful with the quotes because Freidman said "I just think that if it's going to be Flames Canucks, for a guy like Lindholm you guys (Vancouver) are going to have to pay a little more than some other teams will." So NO, he's not referencing CHI would have to pay more for Kuz. He's actually doing to opposite. He's implying Kuz is NOT a top 6 guy because Vancouver is "No quesiton they're looking for a top 6 forward"

Friedman again "I think the Canucks are going to be looking to open up some cap room. For you to go out and get a player like a Guentzel or a Henrique or a Lindholm or anyone else, there's going to <strong>HAVE</strong> to be money going out. Look we all kinda see where this is going with Kuzmenko". He's implying something that's not good between VAN and Kuzmenko, but doesn't explicitly state anything. He's the one saying VAN HAS to shed cap...so your words vs his?

I'm not sure where you're getting your information. It really feels like you trying to piece different quotes together to prop up value. If you truly listed to Freidman and believe him...then it really sounds like Vancouver is trying to DUMP his contract. NOT that he's some valuable piece to VAN. Seems more like a Jason Dickinson move than a JT Miller move...IF YOU believe Friedman.</div></div>

Thanks for repeating what I had quoted. Of course, Friedman is not referencing Chicago when he's talking about Calgary. He talks about Kuzmenko and Chicago afterward.

Now whose making things up? You're putting far too much emphasis on the have. There have already been conversations around retention that Vancouver can still make the money work.

I'm getting my information from Friedman and other insiders. The Canucks have repeatedly said they're not wanting to move Kuzmenko unless it makes sense. The only way that happens is if it gives the Canucks assets to help acquire an upgrade.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 31 at 2:21 a.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>I appreciate your quotes and I do believe those are accurate quotes. I want to give you credit for that. Do you not see the leaps you're trying to make from those quotes? Do you not see the other quotes talking VAN needing cap space to make a Lindholm work? I could apply what you're doing and show that Kuz is worth future considerations because the Las Vegas Knights had a Vezina winning Goalie and the Hawks needed a goalie to which they got him for essentially future considerations. JT Miller isn't the baseline for any trade.</div></div>

The Canucks can already acquire Lindholm and Guentzel without shedding salary, they'd pay an extra pick for retention or double retention.

The point that Friedman raises behind trading Kuzmenko is to get futures to move for Lindholm/Guentzel, "[Vancouver] has the ability to make trades with [Calgary] but you have to pay a little bit more [references the Zadorov trade]." Friedman references the Top-6 guys and then goes on to talk about how Kuzmenko would work to help facilitate those deals.

There's also the other tidbit that Friedman mentions, that Chicago has been the one asking about Kuzmenko, <em>not Vancouver.</em> In the examples that you gave (goalie to the Hawks) it was the other way around, Vegas shopping their goalie to the highest bidder to clear cap space. The Canucks don't have that same concern because Kuzmenko is still performing. The reason that they'd move him out is to improve short-term (ie. getting the assets to acquire better players on expiring deals).

That's why the Miller, Ristolainen, and Reinhart trades I referenced before follow the closer suit. It was not Tampa, Buffalo, or NYI going out and offering these players, it was Vancouver, Philadelphia, and Edmonton reaching out to buy. Chicago falls into the latter category based on the reports far more than Vancouver does in the former.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 30 at 8:38 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 30 at 8:35 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 30 at 8:28 p.m.
Thread: Jiricek
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>Ok, so I just listened to his on Donnie and Dahli...he did NOT say CHI has been pestering them all season. He did say that after his thoughts podcast some unconfirmed sources have said there was potential discussion and they've done the AB deal...so they could do one, BUT it was all in the context that VAN is trying to free up capspace for a better top 6 forward. I agree its a decent fit. But it DEFINITELY didn't sound like the Hawks were desperate and he's just trying to find cap situation where VAN could send that contract. NOT that CHI was willing to send anything serious for him.</div></div>

"We all see where this is going, and if you look at [Chicago] they are looking for guys who don't have a lot of term, they just extended three guys. [They're willing to pay] and Kuzmenko can score, he's struggled this year, but he can score."

"Ever since I blurted it out on [32 Thoughts] I've had people telling me it's [more than] that, they think Chicago has looked into the possibility of [acquiring Kuzmenko]."

"There's a lot of circumstantial evidence. It makes a lot of sense for both the Blackhawks and the Canucks."

So according to Freidman, they're willing to pay to get Kuzmenko. Kuzmenko can score. If you look at similar deals that have gone down in previous years, you'll see its pretty fair. The Canucks are a prime example. In the middle of a rebuild, they sent out a 1st + 3rd + prospect for JT Miller at 5.25M for 4 years left when he was considered a cap dump on Tampa. People screamed about overpaying. Turns out, it was a great trade for Vancouver. Same thing can happen with Kuzmenko with Bedard in Chicago.