Forums/Armchair-GM

Singing the Blues

Créé par: Sco
Date de création initiale: 10 janv. 2022
Publié: 10 janv. 2022
Équipe: 2021-22 Flames de Calgary
Transactions
1.
CGY
  1. Tarasenko, Vladimir
  2. Thomas, Robert
  3. 2022 4e round pick (STL)
  4. 2022 6e round pick (STL)
STL
  1. Monahan, Sean (2 500 000 $ retained)
  2. Tkachuk, Matthew
  3. 2022 5e round pick (CGY)
Rachats de contrats
  • Troy Brouwer: 1 500 000 $
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
  • Sean Monahan: 2 500 000 $ (39.22%)
Enfoui
  • Juuso Välimäki: 425 000 $ (1 550 000 $)
ANNÉE DE REPÊCHAGERONDE 1RONDE 2RONDE 3RONDE 4RONDE 5RONDE 6RONDE 7
2022
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de FLA
Logo de STL
Logo de STL
Logo de CGY
2023
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
2024
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
Logo de CGY
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2281 500 000 $78 750 000 $0 $0 $2 750 000 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de CGY
Gaudreau, Johnny
6 750 000 $
AG
NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Lindholm, Elias
4 850 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 3
Logo de STL
Tarasenko, Vladimir
7 500 000 $
AD
NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de CGY
Coleman, Blake
4 900 000 $
AG, AD
NTC
UFA - 6
Logo de STL
Thomas, Robert
2 800 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 2
Logo de CGY
Mangiapane, Andrew
2 425 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Lucic, Milan
5 250 000 $
AG
NMC NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de CGY
Backlund, Mikael
5 350 000 $
C
NTC
UFA - 3
Logo de CGY
Dubé, Dillon
2 300 000 $
AG, AD
RFA - 3
Logo de CGY
Lewis, Trevor
800 000 $
AD
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Richardson, Brad
800 000 $
C
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Ritchie, Brett
900 000 $
AD
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Pitlick, Tyler
1 750 000 $
AD
UFA - 1
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de CGY
Hanifin, Noah
4 950 000 $
DG
UFA - 3
Logo de CGY
Andersson, Rasmus
4 550 000 $
DD
UFA - 5
Logo de CGY
Markström, Jacob
6 000 000 $
G
NMC
UFA - 5
Logo de CGY
Zadorov, Nikita
3 750 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Tanev, Christopher
4 500 000 $
DD
NTC
UFA - 3
Logo de CGY
Vladar, Daniel
750 000 $
G
RFA - 2
Logo de CGY
Kylington, Oliver
750 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Gudbranson, Erik
1 950 000 $
DD
UFA - 1
Logo de CGY
Stone, Michael
750 000 $
DD
UFA - 1
Équipe de réserve
Logo de CGY
Ruzicka, Adam
801 666 $ (0 $)
C, AD
RFA - 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
10 janv. à 13 h 9
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 14,917
Mentions "j'aime": 8,315
Don't see either team doing this
mokumboi a aimé ceci.
10 janv. à 13 h 10
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2018
Messages: 6,405
Mentions "j'aime": 2,952
But... why?
10 janv. à 13 h 12
#3
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
I could see it after the season, but not during.
10 janv. à 13 h 15
#4
mokumboi
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2019
Messages: 14,990
Mentions "j'aime": 5,860
As soon as you ask for Thomas, there's no more discussion. Not available. And Monahan is of less than no interest, so the value here is way off anyway.
xercuses a aimé ceci.
10 janv. à 13 h 15
#5
Xercuses
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 8,632
Mentions "j'aime": 2,334
Blues decline Thomas isn’t going anywhere
10 janv. à 13 h 16
#6
Xercuses
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 8,632
Mentions "j'aime": 2,334
Quoting: suburbanrobot
I could see it after the season, but not during.

I can’t see it ever happening
10 janv. à 13 h 26
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: xercuses
Blues decline Thomas isn’t going anywhere


Thomas would certainly go somewhere if it meant Tkachuk in return. If Tarasenko still wants to go after the season he's basically a lame duck in St. Louis. The days of Thomas being cost controlled are coming to an end and he's going to get at least ~$5.0 AAV in the very near future.
10 janv. à 13 h 28
#8
Xercuses
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 8,632
Mentions "j'aime": 2,334
Quoting: suburbanrobot
Thomas would certainly go somewhere if it meant Tkachuk in return. If Tarasenko still wants to go after the season he's basically a lame duck in St. Louis. The days of Thomas being cost controlled are coming to an end and he's going to get at least ~$5.0 AAV in the very near future.


Blues can pay it and Thomas is a center so he holds a lot of value there while we don’t need another winger
Sicarius a aimé ceci.
10 janv. à 13 h 33
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: xercuses
Blues can pay it and Thomas is a center so he holds a lot of value there while we don’t need another winger


Tkachuk is better than any forward (or player for that matter) the Blues have on the roster and is an unbelievably good fit in STL. If you are losing Tarasenko anyway this is a no brainer IMO.
10 janv. à 13 h 34
#10
Xercuses
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 8,632
Mentions "j'aime": 2,334
Quoting: suburbanrobot
Tkachuk is better than any forward (or player for that matter) the Blues have on the roster and is an unbelievably good fit in STL. If you are losing Tarasenko anyway this is a no brainer IMO.


I’ll trade you Schenn and VT instead and we can add picks for tkachuck
10 janv. à 13 h 38
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: xercuses
I’ll trade you Schenn and VT instead and we can add picks for tkachuck


Sure that is a (much) better deal for STL but Calgary ain't biting without at least one good younger asset. Maybe Perunovich + a 1st rounder could replace Thomas but I doubt it.
10 janv. à 13 h 39
#12
Xercuses
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2021
Messages: 8,632
Mentions "j'aime": 2,334
Quoting: suburbanrobot
Sure that is a (much) better deal for STL but Calgary ain't biting without at least one good younger asset. Maybe Perunovich + a 1st rounder could replace Thomas but I doubt it.


Same honestly I could see blues maybe signing Tkachuch as a FA in the far furture too
10 janv. à 13 h 40
#13
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2017
Messages: 1,656
Mentions "j'aime": 431
Tarasenko and a pick for Tkachuk, he’s probably going to hold out again this offseason and they’re both great fits on the other team. I’m not sure VT waives for Calgary but that’s not what CapFriendly is for.
10 janv. à 13 h 45
#14
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: BluesBandit
Tarasenko and a pick for Tkachuk, he’s probably going to hold out again this offseason and they’re both great fits on the other team. I’m not sure VT waives for Calgary but that’s not what CapFriendly is for.


Tarasenko with 1 year left and a pick isn't nearly enough for Tkachuk.
10 janv. à 13 h 49
#15
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2017
Messages: 1,656
Mentions "j'aime": 431
Quoting: suburbanrobot
Tarasenko with 1 year left and a pick isn't nearly enough for Tkachuk.


Let’s say both walk after next year. Tarasenko is out scoring Tkachuk this year. Tkatchuk will probably ask for 9+ this offseason and I’d bet Tarasenko out scores him next year. Maybe he doesn’t, but will MT score so much more than VT that he’ll cover the difference in salary? Probably not.
10 janv. à 14 h 12
#16
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: BluesBandit
Let’s say both walk after next year. Tarasenko is out scoring Tkachuk this year. Tkatchuk will probably ask for 9+ this offseason and I’d bet Tarasenko out scores him next year. Maybe he doesn’t, but will MT score so much more than VT that he’ll cover the difference in salary? Probably not.


Tkachuk is an RFA and 24 years old, he can't just walk. He'd be a trade and sign (similar to Buchnevich). Tarasenko is a 30 year old UFA after one more season with no team control. That changes the math on their respective values massively.

Tkachuk is only one year older than Kyrou and Perunovich and two years older than Thomas just to give a frame of reference. His best years are still ahead and he's already one of the top 50 or so players in the league.
10 janv. à 14 h 16
#17
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2017
Messages: 1,656
Mentions "j'aime": 431
Quoting: suburbanrobot
Tkachuk is an RFA and 24 years old, he can't just walk. He'd be a trade and sign (similar to Buchnevich). Tarasenko is a 30 year old UFA after one more season with no team control. That changes the math on their respective values massively.

Tkachuk is only one year older than Kyrou and Perunovich and two years older than Thomas just to give a frame of reference. His best years are still ahead and he's already one of the top 50 or so players in the league.

Tkachuk can walk after next year if he’s not extended.
10 janv. à 14 h 30
#18
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: BluesBandit
Tkachuk can walk after next year if he’s not extended.


He's under team control; Tarasenko is not. He's also 6 years younger, has produced more consistently, and is a better two way player. If he could be had for a guy like Tarasenko + a 1st rounder he would have already been traded.
10 janv. à 18 h 57
#19
Sicarius
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: nov. 2016
Messages: 1,209
Mentions "j'aime": 201
Quoting: suburbanrobot
Tkachuk is better than any forward (or player for that matter) the Blues have on the roster and is an unbelievably good fit in STL. If you are losing Tarasenko anyway this is a no brainer IMO.


This is ludicrous.


Tkachuk Would not be the best player on the Blues roster and the Blues are not “losing Tarasenko”

If teams want Tarasenko the return is a 1st plus good prospect and maybe more. The Blues are never in a million years trading Thomas for Tkachuk.

Even if Tarasenko is traded after this year the Blues would never be pursuing Tkachuk. He simply costs too much money and the Blues are stocked with wingers.

Schenn will be a permanent winger as well, just a fyi.

So this trade proposal is just wrong in so many ways.
10 janv. à 20 h 58
#20
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: Sicarius
This is ludicrous.


Tkachuk Would not be the best player on the Blues roster and the Blues are not “losing Tarasenko”

If teams want Tarasenko the return is a 1st plus good prospect and maybe more. The Blues are never in a million years trading Thomas for Tkachuk.

Even if Tarasenko is traded after this year the Blues would never be pursuing Tkachuk. He simply costs too much money and the Blues are stocked with wingers.

Schenn will be a permanent winger as well, just a fyi.

So this trade proposal is just wrong in so many ways.


I'm not sure what is wrong here?

1) The list of Blues players that you could argue today are better than Matthew Tkachuk start and end with Jordan Kyrou. By any advanced metric you want to use (Corsi, Fenwick, Point Shares, etc.) Tkachuk is better than anyone the Blues have signed. His 4.4 point share is higher than anyone on the roster (Kyrou is the Blues' highest with 4.3). He has a higher Corsi (both actual and relative) than anyone on the roster (Krug is team best with 7.1 rel at even strength, Tkachuk is at 9.2). And it isn't like this is a one year flash thing -- Tkachuk has been consistently really good for several seasons. It should not be a controversial take that he's a better player than the Blues have. That's not a slight; he's just a truly great player and the Blues are good because they have a lot of guys that are very good.

2) The Blues are absolutely "losing Tarasenko" unless he has a massive change of heart and decides to re-up with the team after next year. A very unlikely prospect at this point.

3) Agree on your return for Tarasenko if the Blues were not contending and shipping him out for picks. This is different -- Tkachuk is a better/more valuable player than Tarasenko and anyone that isn't a massive Blues homer would steadfastly agree.

4) In this case you are shipping Tarasenko for Tkachuk so not sure how the Blues would be overstocked with wingers. It's not like Tkachuk would be blocking a world beating talent.

5) Yes, cap is tricky. Tkachuk probably 8.5x8. You lose Tarasenko's 7.5, but then you also have to pay Kyrou who will command at least 7.5. Thomas will need 5.5-6.0 in his own right so DA has a LOT of cap navigation to work out. Schenn/Parayko/Binnington/Krug/Faulk contracts are really tough in an environment where the cap isn't going up.
10 janv. à 21 h 32
#21
Sicarius
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: nov. 2016
Messages: 1,209
Mentions "j'aime": 201
Quoting: suburbanrobot
I'm not sure what is wrong here?

1) The list of Blues players that you could argue today are better than Matthew Tkachuk start and end with Jordan Kyrou. By any advanced metric you want to use (Corsi, Fenwick, Point Shares, etc.) Tkachuk is better than anyone the Blues have signed. His 4.4 point share is higher than anyone on the roster (Kyrou is the Blues' highest with 4.3). He has a higher Corsi (both actual and relative) than anyone on the roster (Krug is team best with 7.1 rel at even strength, Tkachuk is at 9.2). And it isn't like this is a one year flash thing -- Tkachuk has been consistently really good for several seasons. It should not be a controversial take that he's a better player than the Blues have. That's not a slight; he's just a truly great player and the Blues are good because they have a lot of guys that are very good.

2) The Blues are absolutely "losing Tarasenko" unless he has a massive change of heart and decides to re-up with the team after next year. A very unlikely prospect at this point.

3) Agree on your return for Tarasenko if the Blues were not contending and shipping him out for picks. This is different -- Tkachuk is a better/more valuable player than Tarasenko and anyone that isn't a massive Blues homer would steadfastly agree.

4) In this case you are shipping Tarasenko for Tkachuk so not sure how the Blues would be overstocked with wingers. It's not like Tkachuk would be blocking a world beating talent.

5) Yes, cap is tricky. Tkachuk probably 8.5x8. You lose Tarasenko's 7.5, but then you also have to pay Kyrou who will command at least 7.5. Thomas will need 5.5-6.0 in his own right so DA has a LOT of cap navigation to work out. Schenn/Parayko/Binnington/Krug/Faulk contracts are really tough in an environment where the cap isn't going up.



Let’s define losing Tarasenko. If Seattle had taken him that would have been losing him. What the Blues trade him and get a 1st and valuable assets this no longer qualifies as losing. Losing a player refers to getting nothing in return when a player leaves the organization.

The Blues lost Brett Hul for example.

Your use of advanced state sounds like an agent arguing for more money.

Tkachuk is in the last year of his deal. Realistically, what’s his next deal look like, 9+ million per season? You don’t have to convince Blues fans that Tkachuk is good. We all know he’s a great player but he’s not a generational player. I wouldn’t want to pay him what he will get if I were a GM.

The value of a player isn’t just measured in advanced stats. For example, I’d rather pay Perron close to 4 million for the next 4 years than pay Tkachuk 9 etc..

Pretty much all Blues fans would like Tkachuk on the roster if the circumstances were right. Neither this trade nor real life presents it.
10 janv. à 22 h 41
#22
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2019
Messages: 97
Mentions "j'aime": 36
Quoting: Sicarius
Let’s define losing Tarasenko. If Seattle had taken him that would have been losing him. What the Blues trade him and get a 1st and valuable assets this no longer qualifies as losing. Losing a player refers to getting nothing in return when a player leaves the organization.

The Blues lost Brett Hul for example.

Your use of advanced state sounds like an agent arguing for more money.

Tkachuk is in the last year of his deal. Realistically, what’s his next deal look like, 9+ million per season? You don’t have to convince Blues fans that Tkachuk is good. We all know he’s a great player but he’s not a generational player. I wouldn’t want to pay him what he will get if I were a GM.

The value of a player isn’t just measured in advanced stats. For example, I’d rather pay Perron close to 4 million for the next 4 years than pay Tkachuk 9 etc..

Pretty much all Blues fans would like Tkachuk on the roster if the circumstances were right. Neither this trade nor real life presents it.


I mean...you are moving the goalposts. You said in your last post "Tkachuk Would not be the best player on the Blues roster". That's not correct and I cited a bunch of stuff to basically prove it out, though not sure I should have bothered because you dismissed it as sounding like an agent asking for more money.

So now that we have established that Tkachuk would in fact be the best player on the Blues roster, we get to the work of figuring out a fair deal for him. In this case, the proposal was basically Tarasenko and Thomas for Tkachuk (I'll ignore the rest to keep it simple).

Tkachuk would come with let's say 8x8.5 AAV.

Tarasenko has 1x7.5 and then is gone. Thomas has 1x2.8 but the Blues have team control thereafter. He likely either takes a deal like 8x6.5 (maybe a bit more) or a 3-4 year bridge deal at a slightly lower cost.

So your two options:

Scenario 1 (trade Tarasenko for pick+prospect): Thomas at 2.8 year 1 and ~6.5 for several more years, 1st round pick, mid-level prospect
Scenario 2 (trade Tarasenko + Thomas for Tkachuk): Tkachuk at 8x8.5

Then the question -- would you trade Thomas + a 1st round pick (Tarasenko return) + a mid-level prospect (Tarasenko return) for Tkachuk on a long term deal? I say yes, you probably say no. Either way, it certainly isn't a "ludicrous" play as you said in your first post.
11 janv. à 0 h 24
#23
Sicarius
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: nov. 2016
Messages: 1,209
Mentions "j'aime": 201
Quoting: suburbanrobot
I mean...you are moving the goalposts. You said in your last post "Tkachuk Would not be the best player on the Blues roster". That's not correct and I cited a bunch of stuff to basically prove it out, though not sure I should have bothered because you dismissed it as sounding like an agent asking for more money.

So now that we have established that Tkachuk would in fact be the best player on the Blues roster, we get to the work of figuring out a fair deal for him. In this case, the proposal was basically Tarasenko and Thomas for Tkachuk (I'll ignore the rest to keep it simple).

Tkachuk would come with let's say 8x8.5 AAV.

Tarasenko has 1x7.5 and then is gone. Thomas has 1x2.8 but the Blues have team control thereafter. He likely either takes a deal like 8x6.5 (maybe a bit more) or a 3-4 year bridge deal at a slightly lower cost.

So your two options:

Scenario 1 (trade Tarasenko for pick+prospect): Thomas at 2.8 year 1 and ~6.5 for several more years, 1st round pick, mid-level prospect
Scenario 2 (trade Tarasenko + Thomas for Tkachuk): Tkachuk at 8x8.5

Then the question -- would you trade Thomas + a 1st round pick (Tarasenko return) + a mid-level prospect (Tarasenko return) for Tkachuk on a long term deal? I say yes, you probably say no. Either way, it certainly isn't a "ludicrous" play as you said in your first post.


Quoting: suburbanrobot
I mean...you are moving the goalposts. You said in your last post "Tkachuk Would not be the best player on the Blues roster". That's not correct and I cited a bunch of stuff to basically prove it out, though not sure I should have bothered because you dismissed it as sounding like an agent asking for more money.

So now that we have established that Tkachuk would in fact be the best player on the Blues roster, we get to the work of figuring out a fair deal for him. In this case, the proposal was basically Tarasenko and Thomas for Tkachuk (I'll ignore the rest to keep it simple).

Tkachuk would come with let's say 8x8.5 AAV.

Tarasenko has 1x7.5 and then is gone. Thomas has 1x2.8 but the Blues have team control thereafter. He likely either takes a deal like 8x6.5 (maybe a bit more) or a 3-4 year bridge deal at a slightly lower cost.

So your two options:

Scenario 1 (trade Tarasenko for pick+prospect): Thomas at 2.8 year 1 and ~6.5 for several more years, 1st round pick, mid-level prospect
Scenario 2 (trade Tarasenko + Thomas for Tkachuk): Tkachuk at 8x8.5

Then the question -- would you trade Thomas + a 1st round pick (Tarasenko return) + a mid-level prospect (Tarasenko return) for Tkachuk on a long term deal? I say yes, you probably say no. Either way, it certainly isn't a "ludicrous" play as you said in your first post.



I tried showing you that advanced stats isn’t the end of your discussion. I don’t think Tkachuk would be the best nor most talented now most valuable player on the Blues.

Kyrou, Buchnevich , and Tarasenko all have higher p/gp than Tkachuk. This isn’t a one category thing when weighing value to the team. When you factor in everything, cost, stats, team control, position, it’s fairly easy to say Tkachuk would not be the best player nor most valuable.

It’s ok if you disagree.

Yes I stand firmly by this proposal is ludicrous by a landslide.

If you spent time evaluating the Blues roster you would see this isn’t what they need at all. The most glaring need is a #1 LHD and it’s not close.

So I would propose not only are any of your options not realistic, they don’t address roster needs.

The correct offer is to trade futures for the LHD in Chychrun, Lindholm, etc..

The next move is to trade Tarasenko for a futures package after this year.

This would give a roster like the following in 22-23.

Saad ROR Perron
Kyrou Thomas Schenn
Buchnevich Barbashev Kostin
Brown Bozak Sundqvist

Chychrun, Parayko
Krug Faulk
Mikkola Perunovich

This is how Army builds rosters. It’s death by a million cuts instead of incredibly top heavy superstar teams like Edmonton etc..

I also disagree with your estimate of Tkachuk getting anything less than 9 million per season, but we’ll see
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage