SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Dnvr chaos

Créé par: gkingery07
Équipe: 2021-22 Avalanche du Colorado
Date de création initiale: 26 juill. 2021
Publié: 26 juill. 2021
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
21 750 000 $
21 000 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
11 500 000 $
56 000 000 $
44 000 000 $
Transactions
1.
ANA
  1. Barron, Justin
  2. Compher, J.T.
  3. Ranta, Sampo
  4. Choix de 1e ronde en 2022 (COL)
  5. Choix de 1e ronde en 2023 (COL)
2.
COL
  1. Formenton, Alex
  2. Choix de 2e ronde en 2022 (OTT)
3.
COL
  1. Twarynski, Carsen [Droits de RFA]
SEA
  1. Johnson, Erik
  2. Choix de 2e ronde en 2022 (OTT)
4.
CGY
  1. Bowers, Shane
  2. Newhook, Alex
  3. Choix de 2e ronde en 2023 (COL)
  4. Choix de 1e ronde en 2024 (COL)
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2022
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
2023
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
2024
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2281 500 000 $79 671 269 $1 741 463 $3 007 500 $1 828 731 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Flames de Calgary
7 000 000 $7 000 000 $
AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
6 300 000 $6 300 000 $
C
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
9 250 000 $9 250 000 $
AD, C
UFA - 4
Logo de Ducks d'Anaheim
2 463 139 $2 463 139 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
C
UFA - 6
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
4 900 000 $4 900 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
2 500 000 $2 500 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
1 750 000 $1 750 000 $
C
UFA - 2
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
4 000 000 $4 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 5
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
725 000 $725 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
809 167 $809 167 $ (Bonis de performance82 500 $$82K)
C, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance425 000 $$425K)
AD
RFA - 2
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
4 100 000 $4 100 000 $
DG
UFA - 3
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
9 000 000 $9 000 000 $
DD
UFA - 6
Logo de Ducks d'Anaheim
6 400 000 $6 400 000 $
G
M-NTC
UFA - 6
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 6
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
894 167 $894 167 $ (Bonis de performance2 500 000 $$2M)
DG/DD
RFA - 2
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
G
UFA - 1
1 500 000 $1 500 000 $
DG
UFA - 4
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
DD
RFA - 2
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
725 000 $725 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Avalanche du Colorado
750 000 $750 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1

Code d'intégration

  • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
  • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

Texte intégré

Cliquer pour surligner
26 juill. 2021 à 1 h 15
#1
Flames
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 1,114
Mentions "j'aime": 341
No, Flames laugh at you and hang up.
26 juill. 2021 à 3 h 5
#2
we love the avs
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 35
Mentions "j'aime": 7
Quoting: Ansabch12
No, Flames laugh at you and hang up.


Think you're off there, maybe another prospect/Pick but we're well within ballpark in terms of pure value. Now, from a franchise goal standpoint, this maybe makes less sense, but the value's there
26 juill. 2021 à 10 h 32
#3
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2019
Messages: 3,534
Mentions "j'aime": 1,238
OTT declines
26 juill. 2021 à 20 h 19
#4
Flames
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 1,114
Mentions "j'aime": 341
Quoting: OldBaySeasoningOfficial
Think you're off there, maybe another prospect/Pick but we're well within ballpark in terms of pure value. Now, from a franchise goal standpoint, this maybe makes less sense, but the value's there


I really don't understand how you see it like that, Shane Bowers is a B tier prospect, the pick is in 2024 from a team thats likely top 5 in the league, a pretty pointless 2nd from again a team thats likely top 5 in the league, and Alex Newhook is a great value piece im not parting with my best player and future captain for that package. If Byram isn't involved in the trade its a pretty easy no from the Flames.
28 juill. 2021 à 13 h 11
#5
we love the avs
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 35
Mentions "j'aime": 7
Quoting: Ansabch12
I really don't understand how you see it like that, Shane Bowers is a B tier prospect, the pick is in 2024 from a team thats likely top 5 in the league, a pretty pointless 2nd from again a team thats likely top 5 in the league, and Alex Newhook is a great value piece im not parting with my best player and future captain for that package. If Byram isn't involved in the trade its a pretty easy no from the Flames.


You're gonna over value him just like I'm gonna overvalue Landeskog, I don't care if he's *your team's* best player, 2-3 high picks 2-3 three mid-high prospects is plenty fair for a 60-70 point top-15 guy. That's absolutely the starting point lmao. Like I said, maybe throw in an extra pick and/or prospect bc of CO's prospects, but my point was that's the value, in a vaccuum is there. Now, that's a rebuilding blow-it-up move, and it doesn't necessarily seem like that's where CGY is, so yes, this trade doesn't make sense, and under that context, it absolutely would take more to pry him away, BUT in a vaccum the value's there.

You're not gonna get Byram + prospects and picks if you want that trade, value wise. Byram projects as a top-15 NHL defensemen, you could *maybe* get Byram + low-mid prospect or mid pick.

My point's about sheer value, the sheer value is there. The context and what CGY as an org. are trying to do make this trade untenable, hence why it would require more.
28 juill. 2021 à 13 h 12
#6
we love the avs
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 35
Mentions "j'aime": 7
Quoting: Ansabch12
I really don't understand how you see it like that, Shane Bowers is a B tier prospect, the pick is in 2024 from a team thats likely top 5 in the league, a pretty pointless 2nd from again a team thats likely top 5 in the league, and Alex Newhook is a great value piece im not parting with my best player and future captain for that package. If Byram isn't involved in the trade its a pretty easy no from the Flames.


That trade is the equivalent of the "The value's there but this doesn't meet our trade block needs" message in NHL Be a GM mode lmao.
28 juill. 2021 à 21 h 13
#7
Flames
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 1,114
Mentions "j'aime": 341
Quoting: OldBaySeasoningOfficial
You're gonna over value him just like I'm gonna overvalue Landeskog, I don't care if he's *your team's* best player, 2-3 high picks 2-3 three mid-high prospects is plenty fair for a 60-70 point top-15 guy. That's absolutely the starting point lmao. Like I said, maybe throw in an extra pick and/or prospect bc of CO's prospects, but my point was that's the value, in a vaccuum is there. Now, that's a rebuilding blow-it-up move, and it doesn't necessarily seem like that's where CGY is, so yes, this trade doesn't make sense, and under that context, it absolutely would take more to pry him away, BUT in a vaccum the value's there.

You're not gonna get Byram + prospects and picks if you want that trade, value wise. Byram projects as a top-15 NHL defensemen, you could *maybe* get Byram + low-mid prospect or mid pick.

My point's about sheer value, the sheer value is there. The context and what CGY as an org. are trying to do make this trade untenable, hence why it would require more.


I can't argue that because you're absolutely right in a vacuum the projection you said for Tkachuk's value is definitely that, but the trade you offered in my opinion is not equal to the value you stated, the 2-3 high picks, and the 2-3 mid-high prospects. Because your pick is extremely low, Shane Bowers wouldn't interest me at all if i'm GMBT, Newhook is the only player in there that interests me. But if im giving up Matthew Tkachuk I need more than just Newhook to interest me, otherwise the answers no.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage