I'd start by shedding Pavel's contract since he is likely leaving. The Yotes' project to have trouble getting to the cap floor again next year, so do a deal similar to what they got when they took on the Pronger contract. They need D Prospect depth, so throw them Ouellet. He's NHL ready and doesn't project to have a role with the Wings. The Wings have two third-round picks in 2017 (Babcock comp.), so give them one of those to make it worth their while. Take back Al Macinnis' son Ryan, the Yotes' second-rounder in 2014 who had 81 points in 59 games played this year for the Kitchener Rangers in the OHL.
The Flames have NO GOALIES on their roster for the 2016-17 season. I'm sure they'd be happy to take on Jimmy's bad contract after his bounce-back end to 2016. They also lack winger depth, so I gave them Nyquist. I understand he still has a high ceiling and is a capable scorer, but I would rather have Mantha/Larkin or Frk (down the road) in my top 6. And my scenario has them getting Stamkos, so someone's bubble has to burst. Sending Jimmy and Gus sheds over $9 million (!!!) so that creates the money to sign Stamkos. The Wings would take back D-prospect Oliver Kylington, a second-rounder from last year. He's solid and was projected to go higher, the Flames stole him at pick 60. I did a swap of 2016 first-round picks as well. The Wings are likely picking in the top 16, but Calgary could end up in picking in the top 5! You could get an NHL ready forward prospect or a defenseman that isn't far from being ready (Chychurn, Jolevi, Sergachev on D and Tkachuk, Dubois on O). Remember guys, dream scenario.
Most of my free-agent signings were house cleaning things. I let Helm walk, because I think you could only have one type of Helm/Abdelkader player (they chose Abby at a bad price, IMO). Marchenko, Sheahan and Pulkkinen all get bridge deals while Mrazek and DeKeyser get fair, long-term deals. Maybe offer Petr a little more but you could always extend him down the road. I'd be fine giving him something in the $5-5.5 million range.
I also took care of Nosek and Callahan, who both have a case to be fourth-line guys next year. Coreau becomes the back-up goalie at a good price.
This is where it gets fun. I gave Stamkos $9.5 million. Hear me out: Tampa's highest offer was around $8.5 million (I think.) They have to choose between him or their solid young guys (Kucherov, Johnson, Namestnikov, Nesterov, Palat, Killorn and a few others all due for contracts in the next two years). Out-bidding Tampa by $1 million should lock him up. If I were Stevie, I'd choose all those young guys over Stamkos. Especially with the emergence of Drouin (side note: Stevie will look like a genius for not trading Drouin. Can he be out GM?) At $9.5 million USD, he would be making more money in America than going to Toronto. Toronto could offer him a ton more, but the Canadian dollar significantly de-values that amount. Plus they have higher taxes. And people over-estimate Stamkos' "wanting to go home." He was never a Leafs fan, and was an Yzerman fan growing up. Maybe the pressure to play in Toronto is too much? IMO, the Lightning have the best shot to sign him, but the Wings could be in the picture if they have the cap-space to do it.
My second big signing is Anaheim RFA Sami Vatanen. He's only 24, is right-handed (which the Wings need), was +8 this year and can QB the power-play. He could score a ton of goals as the Wings' PPQB. He also has an absurdly high 5v5 CF%, but I'll spare you guys from the advanced statistics. Rumors had it around trade-deadline time that his camp was asing for somewhere in the ball-park of 5-6 years and an AAV of $6 million. DO IT. I would go as far as to try a sign-and-trade. Edmonton is rumored to be in the picture here. The Ducks have around $16 million committed to five D-men next year, so they won't be able to afford both Vatanen and Hampus Lindholm (also a FA the Wings should look at). I doubt they'll match anything $6 mill or more, so take a stab at it!
Hope you guys liked my dream scenario for the Red Wings! Let me know what you think. I'd love to chat with anyone about it.
How did you sign another teams RFA? You willing to give up the compensation if said player signs and they don't match? I think they would match that in a heart beat.
You obviously don't know much about how contracts work. AA as first line C, seriously? Teemu in the lineup, seriously? Ericsson and Kronwall still paired together?? haha, alright then.
From a Flames stand point, a big no thanks to that trade. Flames are just finishing up year 3 of the rebuild and are not going to be trading a top 5 pick (lottery pending) or our #1 defense prospect, with an aging, overpaid, under performing 30+ year old goalie as the center piece in the return. Better off just signing Reimer and keeping the young assets.
Also, while I don't mind the skill Nyquist brings, the Flames are trying to get bigger on the wings so he doesn't really fit either.
One more thing, this trade makes no sense for the Flames cap wise either. Can't be taking on almost $10 million in cap with nothing going the other way.
How did you sign another teams RFA? You willing to give up the compensation if said player signs and they don't match? I think they would match that in a heart beat.
I would be more scared of ANA NOT matching that and we actually sign Vatanen. We would have to give up TWO first rounders, a second, and a third round pick at that salary. That would be disastrous.
Furthermore, you can't offer Stamkos 8 years. Only Tampa can do that. He's also not going to sign for 9.5. Think closer to 11.
I don't think either of those trades are realistic. ARI won't give up anything close to valuable in a dats trade. We're going to have to beg them to take it in the first place. CGY isn't giving up their best dman prospect and a potential top 5 pick for a goalie on the wrong side of 30 and our middle first round pick. Nyquist is a valuable trade piece but I don't think valuable enough to make CGY take this trade. Not to mention we probably wouldn't even have our 2016 1st rounder if we sign Vatanen. I'd much rather have Demers or Goligowski for only money. Not Vatanen for money and picks.
How did you sign another teams RFA? You willing to give up the compensation if said player signs and they don't match? I think they would match that in a heart beat.
I think Vatanen is that good. And if Anaheim was going to match, they would have given him the $6 mill already. They shopped him at the deadline.
How did you sign another teams RFA? You willing to give up the compensation if said player signs and they don't match? I think they would match that in a heart beat.
I would be more scared of ANA NOT matching that and we actually sign Vatanen. We would have to give up TWO first rounders, a second, and a third round pick at that salary. That would be disastrous.
Furthermore, you can't offer Stamkos 8 years. Only Tampa can do that. He's also not going to sign for 9.5. Think closer to 11.
I don't think either of those trades are realistic. ARI won't give up anything close to valuable in a dats trade. We're going to have to beg them to take it in the first place. CGY isn't giving up their best dman prospect and a potential top 5 pick for a goalie on the wrong side of 30 and our middle first round pick. Nyquist is a valuable trade piece but I don't think valuable enough to make CGY take this trade. Not to mention we probably wouldn't even have our 2016 1st rounder if we sign Vatanen. I'd much rather have Demers or Goligowski for only money. Not Vatanen for money and picks.
Trades weren't supposed to be super-realistic. I doubt either Calgary or Arizona would part with some solid prospects. Demers/Goligoski don't cut it for me. I think an AAV of 9.5 gets Stamkos. Tampa's offer of mid-8's was rumored to be respectable to the Stamkos camp. So despite the years I gave, I think the Wings have a shot if they clear some cap-space.
You obviously don't know much about how contracts work. AA as first line C, seriously? Teemu in the lineup, seriously? Ericsson and Kronwall still paired together?? haha, alright then.
Feel you in Krownwall and Ericsson. But no GM in the league is taking those contracts on. And if they're getting paid that much, they won't be healthy scratches at any point in their careers (see this year). Best we could hope for them is the expansion draft, and from what I understand guys with NMCs and NTCs may not be leaving any way. In which case: the Wings would be screwed.
And yes, Athanasiou is my first line center going forward. You must not watch much hockey or know about advanced statistics. His corsi/fenwick is off the charts. And if we;re using the eye-test, he's been the best Wings' forward since Feburary, in very limited minutes. They've been trying to find a second line center for 5 years since they lost Filppula. Bertuzzi got old, Helm was never more than a bottom 6 guy, Weiss was a bust and so was Richards. The point of the second line C was to enable them to put Datsyuk and Zetterberg together. Well now Datsyuk is leaving and Zetterberg is too old and underproductive to be a first line C. My suggestion? Make him the second line c they've needed for years. He could still be solid in a smaller role. Sheahan won't be more than a third line C and AA has more than proved he is ready. It's not that crazy... And Pulkkinen is a capable scorer. Just needs minutes and needs to not be in a fourth line checking role. He's been the answer on the PP all year, but Blash can't use him because he's been handcuffed with bad contracts that need to get playing time (Richards, Andersson, Abdelkader etc)
From a Flames stand point, a big no thanks to that trade. Flames are just finishing up year 3 of the rebuild and are not going to be trading a top 5 pick (lottery pending) or our #1 defense prospect, with an aging, overpaid, under performing 30+ year old goalie as the center piece in the return. Better off just signing Reimer and keeping the young assets.
Also, while I don't mind the skill Nyquist brings, the Flames are trying to get bigger on the wings so he doesn't really fit either.
One more thing, this trade makes no sense for the Flames cap wise either. Can't be taking on almost $10 million in cap with nothing going the other way.
Sorry man. I agree. I'm just trying to find a team my team can fleece. I think Jimmy Howard makes sense for you guys. Not sure which of your F's or D's you'd be trying to part with in return. Calgary makes sense as a trade partner because Burkie/Treliving haven't shied away from big deals in the past. What would you give up for Howard or Nyquist? Would there be any scenario where you would swap your first with a respectable top 16 first?
How did you sign another teams RFA? You willing to give up the compensation if said player signs and they don't match? I think they would match that in a heart beat.
I would be more scared of ANA NOT matching that and we actually sign Vatanen. We would have to give up TWO first rounders, a second, and a third round pick at that salary. That would be disastrous.
Furthermore, you can't offer Stamkos 8 years. Only Tampa can do that. He's also not going to sign for 9.5. Think closer to 11.
I don't think either of those trades are realistic. ARI won't give up anything close to valuable in a dats trade. We're going to have to beg them to take it in the first place. CGY isn't giving up their best dman prospect and a potential top 5 pick for a goalie on the wrong side of 30 and our middle first round pick. Nyquist is a valuable trade piece but I don't think valuable enough to make CGY take this trade. Not to mention we probably wouldn't even have our 2016 1st rounder if we sign Vatanen. I'd much rather have Demers or Goligowski for only money. Not Vatanen for money and picks.
Trades weren't supposed to be super-realistic. I doubt either Calgary or Arizona would part with some solid prospects. Demers/Goligoski don't cut it for me. I think an AAV of 9.5 gets Stamkos. Tampa's offer of mid-8's was rumored to be respectable to the Stamkos camp. So despite the years I gave, I think the Wings have a shot if they clear some cap-space.
Why don't Demers/Goli cut it? You would rather have Vatanen and no first round pick for the next 2 years than Demers (who you could probably get for unter 5mil AAV) or Goli (who could probably get for under 6mil AAV) and keeping all your picks? You mention 5v5 CF% in your description, but if you look at the stats Demers is a much better shot & goal suppressor and acutaly puts up MORE pts/60 min than Vatanen. Granted, Vatanen is still improving and obviously hasn't reached his ceiling yet but the cost of signing a RFA is sooooo high. If you want to do a sign and trade, that's better; but we still have to trade something/someone to ANA in order to get Vatanen.
As for Stamkos, it's not that we just have to outbid Tampa (you are right in saying that 9.5 would probably cut it there) we have to outbid the ENTIRE NHL. This guy is going to have everyone offering him some kind of contract. That means that the odds are someone is going to offer him the chance to be the highest payed player in the league. So, once again, think around 11 mil.
Why don't Demers/Goli cut it? You would rather have Vatanen and no first round pick for the next 2 years than Demers (who you could probably get for unter 5mil AAV) or Goli (who could probably get for under 6mil AAV) and keeping all your picks? You mention 5v5 CF% in your description, but if you look at the stats Demers is a much better shot & goal suppressor and acutaly puts up MORE pts/60 min than Vatanen. Granted, Vatanen is still improving and obviously hasn't reached his ceiling yet but the cost of signing a RFA is sooooo high. If you want to do a sign and trade, that's better; but we still have to trade something/someone to ANA in order to get Vatanen.
As for Stamkos, it's not that we just have to outbid Tampa (you are right in saying that 9.5 would probably cut it there) we have to outbid the ENTIRE NHL. This guy is going to have everyone offering him some kind of contract. That means that the odds are someone is going to offer him the chance to be the highest payed player in the league. So, once again, think around 11 mil.[/quote]
Didn't know that for Demers. I really like Vatanen because of his age. I would be willing to part with first rounders. The Wings have proven they don't draft well at the back end of the first round. So I'm okay with losing those picks if the the team will already be successful long-term.
Trades werent supposed to be realistic? What are we even talking about then haha, this is nonsense. Youre signing RFAs that wont even be available. I dont care what the "numbers" say. To think that you can just put AA at 1st line center without a full year under his belt is moronic, plain and simple. To overpay a one trick pony like Stamkos that much money for that many years is even more moronic.
Why don't Demers/Goli cut it? You would rather have Vatanen and no first round pick for the next 2 years than Demers (who you could probably get for unter 5mil AAV) or Goli (who could probably get for under 6mil AAV) and keeping all your picks? You mention 5v5 CF% in your description, but if you look at the stats Demers is a much better shot & goal suppressor and acutaly puts up MORE pts/60 min than Vatanen. Granted, Vatanen is still improving and obviously hasn't reached his ceiling yet but the cost of signing a RFA is sooooo high. If you want to do a sign and trade, that's better; but we still have to trade something/someone to ANA in order to get Vatanen.
As for Stamkos, it's not that we just have to outbid Tampa (you are right in saying that 9.5 would probably cut it there) we have to outbid the ENTIRE NHL. This guy is going to have everyone offering him some kind of contract. That means that the odds are someone is going to offer him the chance to be the highest payed player in the league. So, once again, think around 11 mil.
Didn't know that for Demers. I really like Vatanen because of his age. I would be willing to part with first rounders. The Wings have proven they don't draft well at the back end of the first round. So I'm okay with losing those picks if the the team will already be successful long-term.
Would you pay Stamkos 11? I still would.[/quote]
I guess we just disagree on the first rounders part. I mean that's where we got Larkin. Mantha has been slower to develop, sure, but the ceiling is still there. Svechnikov is tearing up Cape Bretton. I think we've done pretty well in the first round in recent years considering we never pick near the top.
As for Stamkos, I'm not sure I would pay 11. Maybe? If we can get rid of Ericsson, then I would be more comfortable. But as I said in my team proposal, I think the offensive potential is for the most part still there. Tightening the D will allow our scores more freedom to take higher risk chances.
Trades werent supposed to be realistic? What are we even talking about then haha, this is nonsense. Youre signing RFAs that wont even be available. I dont care what the "numbers" say. To think that you can just put AA at 1st line center without a full year under his belt is moronic, plain and simple. To overpay a one trick pony like Stamkos that much money for that many years is even more moronic.
Glad to see you think like Holland. Enjoy missing the playoffs with stalled thinking. My trades aren't that unrealistic. You attack away and have the stalled thinking of "I don't care what the numbers say." That's the thinking that has the Wings in the position they're in. PS: I can't take people with poor grammar seriously. Keep attacking people, buddy. I'm sure spreading you crappy rhetoric will get you really far.
I guess we just disagree on the first rounders part. I mean that's where we got Larkin. Mantha has been slower to develop, sure, but the ceiling is still there. Svechnikov is tearing up Cape Bretton. I think we've done pretty well in the first round in recent years considering we never pick near the top.
As for Stamkos, I'm not sure I would pay 11. Maybe? If we can get rid of Ericsson, then I would be more comfortable. But as I said in my team proposal, I think the offensive potential is for the most part still there. Tightening the D will allow our scores more freedom to take higher risk chances.[/quote]
Agreed on Mantha, Larkin and Svech but they've picked much earlier to get those guys. They've missed on a lot of guys in the last decade in the first round. McCollum, Kindl, Smith (kind of, I still like him), Sheahan (could have had Kuznetsov). But they've done well recently for sure, picking earlier. Part of the reason why I want to trade up in this loaded draft. How about a sign and trade, Gus for the rights to Vatanen? Would that be more appealing? I understand you on not wanting to lose firsts, but if the team was successful for a few years, it wouldn't bother me that much.
I guess we just disagree on the first rounders part. I mean that's where we got Larkin. Mantha has been slower to develop, sure, but the ceiling is still there. Svechnikov is tearing up Cape Bretton. I think we've done pretty well in the first round in recent years considering we never pick near the top.
As for Stamkos, I'm not sure I would pay 11. Maybe? If we can get rid of Ericsson, then I would be more comfortable. But as I said in my team proposal, I think the offensive potential is for the most part still there. Tightening the D will allow our scores more freedom to take higher risk chances.
Agreed on Mantha, Larkin and Svech but they've picked much earlier to get those guys. They've missed on a lot of guys in the last decade in the first round. McCollum, Kindl, Smith (kind of, I still like him), Sheahan (could have had Kuznetsov). But they've done well recently for sure, picking earlier. Part of the reason why I want to trade up in this loaded draft. How about a sign and trade, Gus for the rights to Vatanen? Would that be more appealing? I understand you on not wanting to lose firsts, but if the team was successful for a few years, it wouldn't bother me that much.[/quote]
Gus for Vantanen's rights is exactly what I purposed in one of my other armchair gm teams haha. Now you're talking. Seriously, go look at my profile and find the one where I did Gus for vatanen.
As for smith. I love the guy. If you look at the possession stats he's a stud. kindl is obviously the bust. But hey, not everyone bats .1000.
wassie2010 a aimé ceci.
Répondre
CapFriendly
CapFriendly