Forums/Armchair-GM

deadline

Créé par: tmann10
Date de création initiale: 20 janv. 2022
Publié: 20 janv. 2022
Équipe: 2021-22 Wild du Minnesota
Explications
- I'm unsure of what the return for Claude would be but I don't feel that that is too far off. Them retaining that salary doesn't hurt them because his deal is expiring and I can't see them bringing on players that will affect their cap. Two 2nds and a good D prospect seem to be good. Rask is a chip to make it work on the Wild side.
Transactions
1.
MIN
  1. Giroux, Claude (4 000 000 $ retained)
PHI
  1. Hunt, Daemon
  2. Rask, Victor
  3. 2022 2e round pick (MIN)
  4. 2023 2e round pick (MIN)
Rachats de contrats
  • Ryan Suter: 2 371 794 $
  • Zach Parise: 2 371 794 $
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
  • Victor Rask: 2 000 000 $ (50%)
ANNÉE DE REPÊCHAGERONDE 1RONDE 2RONDE 3RONDE 4RONDE 5RONDE 6RONDE 7
2022
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de SJS
Logo de MIN
2023
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
2024
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
Logo de MIN
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2481 500 000 $78 174 421 $0 $815 000 $3 325 579 $

Formation

Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de MIN
Kaprizov, Kirill
9 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 5
Logo de MIN
Hartman, Ryan
1 700 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 3
Logo de MIN
Zuccarello, Mats
6 000 000 $
AD, AG
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo de MIN
Fiala, Kevin
5 100 000 $
AD, AG
RFA - 1
Logo de PHI
Giroux, Claude
137 500 $
C, AD
NMC
UFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Boldy, Matthew
880 833 $
AG, AD
RFA - 2
Logo de MIN
Greenway, Jordan
2 100 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Eriksson Ek, Joel
5 250 000 $
C
UFA - 8
Logo de MIN
Foligno, Marcus
3 100 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 3
Logo de MIN
Dewar, Connor
825 833 $
AG
RFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Sturm, Nico
725 000 $
C
UFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Duhaime, Brandon
750 000 $
AG, AD
RFA - 2
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de MIN
Brodin, Jonas
6 000 000 $
DG
NMC
UFA - 7
Logo de MIN
Dumba, Matt
6 000 000 $
DD
NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de MIN
Talbot, Cam
3 666 667 $
G
UFA - 2
Logo de MIN
Goligoski, Alex
5 000 000 $
DG/DD
NMC
UFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Spurgeon, Jared
7 575 000 $
DD
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo de MIN
Kähkönen, Kaapo
725 000 $
G
RFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Kulikov, Dmitry
2 250 000 $
DG/DD
NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de MIN
Merrill, Jon
850 000 $
DG
UFA - 1
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de MIN
Benn, Jordie
900 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de MIN
Addison, Calen
795 000 $
DD
RFA - 2
Logo de MIN
Gaudreau, Frédérick
1 200 000 $
C
UFA - 2
Logo de MIN
Bjugstad, Nick
900 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 1
Équipe de réserve
Logo de MIN
Hammond, Andrew
750 000 $ (0 $)
G
UFA - 1

Unités spéciales

Avantage numérique 1
Kaprizov, K.
Hartman, R.
Zuccarello, M.
Spurgeon, J.
Goligoski, A.
Avantage numérique 2
Foligno, M.
Giroux, C.
Boldy, M.
Fiala, K.
Spurgeon, J.
Infériorité numérique 1
Eriksson Ek, J.
Foligno, M.
Brodin, J.
Spurgeon, J.
Infériorité numérique 2
Sturm, N.
Duhaime, B.
Kulikov, D.
Merrill, J.

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
20 janv. à 12 h 33
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
That definitely wont get Giroux even without retention
B_seka17 a aimé ceci.
20 janv. à 12 h 36
#2
Démarrer sujet
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2020
Messages: 64
Mentions "j'aime": 11
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
That definitely wont get Giroux even without retention


Genuinely curious about what you think it would take to get him.
20 janv. à 12 h 39
#3
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: tmann10
Genuinely curious about what you think it would take to get him.


1st + one of Addison/Lambos/Beckman. They would probably want Addison. For retention, that probably cost a 2nd in value
tmann10, TanSor, Mintyfresh and 1 other person a aimé ceci.
20 janv. à 12 h 44
#4
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2020
Messages: 1,679
Mentions "j'aime": 1,127
There has to be a 1st included IMO. The retention by Philly has basically no value at deadline since it's only done so the deal can actually be made. I'd say a 1st, Rask (for cap purposes) and a solid prospect gets it done. They could basically pick anybody not named Rossi/Boldy/Wallstedt/Addison/Lambos.

And then Giroux would have to feel comfortable leaving the place he has played for over a decade, but that's another story...
tmann10, drmantalban et TanSor a aimé ceci.
20 janv. à 13 h 10
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 2,155
Mentions "j'aime": 813
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
1st + one of Addison/Lambos/Beckman. They would probably want Addison. For retention, that probably cost a 2nd in value


that's a joke right?

I legit am curious what your historical basis for that is (show me the last time a rental player at the TDL got a 1st, 2nd, and a prospect like Addison or Lambos)
(that's pretty significantly better than what Taylor Hall got from ARZ)

I could easily see the ask being 1st, & a 2nd, (Giroux is still top tier) but no more than that

I am still curious what previous trades you would base that off of.
20 janv. à 14 h 8
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: Shifttee
that's a joke right?

I legit am curious what your historical basis for that is (show me the last time a rental player at the TDL got a 1st, 2nd, and a prospect like Addison or Lambos)
(that's pretty significantly better than what Taylor Hall got from ARZ)

I could easily see the ask being 1st, & a 2nd, (Giroux is still top tier) but no more than that

I am still curious what previous trades you would base that off of.


This is strange because I am almost always the one arguing your side. Maybe you value Addison too high? I'm also assuming Minnesota is dumping cap here to make it work

Hall trade returned a 1st + Merkley + Bahl
Duchene traded for a 1st and a conditional resign 1st, as well as Abramov
Assuming the 2nd was the difference between Miller and Namestnikov, McDonagh returned 1st + Howden + Hajek
Stastny trade returned 1st + Foley (he was playing really well in NCAA at the time)
Rick Nash trade returned 1st + Lindgren (and more)
Iginla trade returned 1st + 2 top NCAA prospects.

Again I think this is a difference in perspectives on Addison. Maybe you are right on Lambos though but Addison is in his D+4 year and playing ok
TanSor a aimé ceci.
20 janv. à 14 h 18
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 8,367
Mentions "j'aime": 6,702
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
1st + one of Addison/Lambos/Beckman. They would probably want Addison. For retention, that probably cost a 2nd in value


This. And that's exactly why I think buying Giroux is a terrible idea. Love him as a player, I just don't think we'll win the cup with him and a deal like this greatly handcuffs our future.
20 janv. à 14 h 20
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: TanSor
This. And that's exactly why I think buying Giroux is a terrible idea. Love him as a player, I just don't think we'll win the cup with him and a deal like this greatly handcuffs our future.


Would 1st + Addison be fine if they took on Rask though. I also don't think it handcuffs you that much either as Minny has a pretty deep prospect pool
20 janv. à 14 h 20
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2020
Messages: 3,965
Mentions "j'aime": 2,560
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
1st + one of Addison/Lambos/Beckman. They would probably want Addison. For retention, that probably cost a 2nd in value



Retention on a rental at the deadline doesn't cost a 2nd. It's a courtesy provided by the team to make the deal happen. That, or taking a cap dump back. These things don't cost extra.
EccE a aimé ceci.
20 janv. à 14 h 23
#10
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 8,367
Mentions "j'aime": 6,702
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Would 1st + Addison be fine if they took on Rask though. I also don't think it handcuffs you that much either as Minny has a pretty deep prospect pool


Still hate it. Rask gets a ton of hate but he's a fine player. Cap hit is way too high but he's been great in a depth role for us. I'd actually be pretty happy if we can get him back at $800-900k this offseason.

We do have a deep pool, but our cap is absolutely f'ed with the Suter/Parise buyouts and we're going to need as many ELC deals as we can get.
20 janv. à 14 h 29
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: Caerii
Retention on a rental at the deadline doesn't cost a 2nd. It's a courtesy provided by the team to make the deal happen. That, or taking a cap dump back. These things don't cost extra.


Yes it does, since when did retention cost nothing? Even at the TDL. It may not cost a 2nd but it certainly isn't free
20 janv. à 14 h 31
#12
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2020
Messages: 3,965
Mentions "j'aime": 2,560
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Yes it does, since when did retention cost nothing? Even at the TDL. It may not cost a 2nd but it certainly isn't free


For a rental? It surely is free. That's how these deals work. The only time retention ever costs anything extra is when a third team gets involved exclusively for the purpose of retention. Retention and cap dumps are tools to make the deals go through, not bargaining chips.
20 janv. à 14 h 32
#13
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: Caerii
For a rental? It surely is free. That's how these deals work. The only time retention ever costs anything extra is when a third team gets involved exclusively for the purpose of retention. Retention and cap dumps are tools to make the deals go through, not bargaining chips.


Isn't a 3rd team getting involved proof that retention isn't free? You literally cant prove it is or isn't otherwise
20 janv. à 14 h 36
#14
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2020
Messages: 3,965
Mentions "j'aime": 2,560
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Isn't a 3rd team getting involved proof that retention isn't free? You literally cant prove it is or isn't otherwise


It's a completely different situation when a third team is brought in to retain. That team is getting nothing out of the deal, and needs to be incentivized to join in. The team trading away the rental in a two team trade is already getting the assets from the trade. So no, it's not proof.
20 janv. à 14 h 51
#15
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: Caerii
It's a completely different situation when a third team is brought in to retain. That team is getting nothing out of the deal, and needs to be incentivized to join in. The team trading away the rental in a two team trade is already getting the assets from the trade. So no, it's not proof.


You know what, there is no way either of us is going to agree on this so Im just going to drop it and move on
20 janv. à 15 h 50
#16
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2019
Messages: 346
Mentions "j'aime": 107
Quoting: Shifttee
that's a joke right?

I legit am curious what your historical basis for that is (show me the last time a rental player at the TDL got a 1st, 2nd, and a prospect like Addison or Lambos)
(that's pretty significantly better than what Taylor Hall got from ARZ)

I could easily see the ask being 1st, & a 2nd, (Giroux is still top tier) but no more than that

I am still curious what previous trades you would base that off of.


Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
This is strange because I am almost always the one arguing your side. Maybe you value Addison too high? I'm also assuming Minnesota is dumping cap here to make it work

Hall trade returned a 1st + Merkley + Bahl
Duchene traded for a 1st and a conditional resign 1st, as well as Abramov
Assuming the 2nd was the difference between Miller and Namestnikov, McDonagh returned 1st + Howden + Hajek
Stastny trade returned 1st + Foley (he was playing really well in NCAA at the time)
Rick Nash trade returned 1st + Lindgren (and more)
Iginla trade returned 1st + 2 top NCAA prospects.

Again I think this is a difference in perspectives on Addison. Maybe you are right on Lambos though but Addison is in his D+4 year and playing ok


I don't know how people can see what Foligno, Barclay Goodrow, and Blake Coleman cost and not think Giroux is worth a good prospect and a 1st. Its inconceivable he isn't worth twice as much as those guys. I know its different style of play. Those guys were tough forwards, but Giroux is bolstering someones top 2 lines with offensive production. I don't know if he's being undervalued by fans because of how poorly the flyers are playing, but Giroux is quite literally the only one keeping them somewhat competitive game to game this year. Singlehandedly. No one wants to overpay for a rental, but you are asking a team to trade the face of their franchise for the last decade, still playing well. Then if the flyers retain half to make the cap easier to maneuver for the remainder of the year... only enhances value.
20 janv. à 15 h 52
#17
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: Mintyfresh
I don't know how people can see what Foligno, Barclay Goodrow, and Blake Coleman cost and not think Giroux is worth a good prospect and a 1st. Its inconceivable he isn't worth twice as much as those guys. I know its different style of play. Those guys were tough forwards, but Giroux is bolstering someones top 2 lines with offensive production. I don't know if he's being undervalued by fans because of how poorly the flyers are playing, but Giroux is quite literally the only one keeping them somewhat competitive game to game this year. Singlehandedly. No one wants to overpay for a rental, but you are asking a team to trade the face of their franchise for the last decade, still playing well. Then if the flyers retain half to make the cap easier to maneuver for the remainder of the year... only enhances value.


Coleman wasn't a rental so that doesn't count. As for Giroux's rental value, nobody will move a blue chip prospect but he should get a return similar to either Hall or Iginla. It should also be noted that Pavelski and Hertl are on the same market and have similar value.
Mintyfresh a aimé ceci.
20 janv. à 15 h 56
#18
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2019
Messages: 346
Mentions "j'aime": 107
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Coleman wasn't a rental so that doesn't count. As for Giroux's rental value, nobody will move a blue chip prospect but he should get a return similar to either Hall or Iginla. It should also be noted that Pavelski and Hertl are on the same market and have similar value.


Agreed!! I think HErtl/Giroux will get about the same value, but I'd imagine Pavelski fetching a little less than those 2 imo.

and thats my bad, I thought Coleman was a rental that year. Thanks for the correction.
20 janv. à 16 h 13
#19
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: Mintyfresh
Agreed!! I think HErtl/Giroux will get about the same value, but I'd imagine Pavelski fetching a little less than those 2 imo.

and thats my bad, I thought Coleman was a rental that year. Thanks for the correction.


I dont see why Pavelski should get less, he's the only one of the 3 over a PPG. Goodrow also wasn't a rental for that matter.
20 janv. à 16 h 30
#20
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2020
Messages: 2,785
Mentions "j'aime": 2,210
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Coleman wasn't a rental so that doesn't count. As for Giroux's rental value, nobody will move a blue chip prospect but he should get a return similar to either Hall or Iginla. It should also be noted that Pavelski and Hertl are on the same market and have similar value.


Then why would you even suggest Addison be included? You seem to be undervaluing a blue chip prospect pretty badly then if you're willing to go against your own statement and think we'd move him for a rental. Even if that rental is Giroux.

Just because the Wild have sufficient depth at defense that allows us to keep Addison out of the lineup and bouncing up and down between the NHL, taxi squad, and the AHL. Doesn't mean he's not doing well, which he is, or that he's done just ok by your definition or change his status as a blue chipper. He's still seen as a top 4 defenseman in terms of potential, tears up the AHL whenever he's down there and is routinely our best defenseman down there, and had played extremely solid for being so young whenever he's be called up to the NHL. Does he have things to work on? Sure. But his talent is obvious and it's simply a matter of time until he replaces Dumba. Frankly put, he's not available or going to be moved for a rental we wouldn't see past this year.

Same for Lambos. The only one of the 3 you mentioned that would even remotely be on the table is Beckman. One of O'Rourke or Hunt is far more realistic.
20 janv. à 18 h 27
#21
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2019
Messages: 24,632
Mentions "j'aime": 12,569
Quoting: RazWild
Then why would you even suggest Addison be included? You seem to be undervaluing a blue chip prospect pretty badly then if you're willing to go against your own statement and think we'd move him for a rental. Even if that rental is Giroux.

Just because the Wild have sufficient depth at defense that allows us to keep Addison out of the lineup and bouncing up and down between the NHL, taxi squad, and the AHL. Doesn't mean he's not doing well, which he is, or that he's done just ok by your definition or change his status as a blue chipper. He's still seen as a top 4 defenseman in terms of potential, tears up the AHL whenever he's down there and is routinely our best defenseman down there, and had played extremely solid for being so young whenever he's be called up to the NHL. Does he have things to work on? Sure. But his talent is obvious and it's simply a matter of time until he replaces Dumba. Frankly put, he's not available or going to be moved for a rental we wouldn't see past this year.

Same for Lambos. The only one of the 3 you mentioned that would even remotely be on the table is Beckman. One of O'Rourke or Hunt is far more realistic.


Because I don't consider Addison to be as good of a prospect as you do maybe? He is like Merkley from the Hall trade.
20 janv. à 19 h 4
#22
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2020
Messages: 2,785
Mentions "j'aime": 2,210
Modifié 20 janv. à 19 h 16
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Because I don't consider Addison to be as good of a prospect as you do maybe? He is like Merkley from the Hall trade.


You may not like him as much as me or consider him a blue chip prospect by personal opinion. But, it does not change his status as a top 50 prospect in the NHL by fact. So whether you agree with it or not, the Wild will not move what is considered a top 50 prospect for a rental, bottom line.

He's also a much better prospect with a higher potential than Merkley ever did or had.
20 janv. à 19 h 5
#23
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2020
Messages: 3,965
Mentions "j'aime": 2,560
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
Because I don't consider Addison to be as good of a prospect as you do maybe? He is like Merkley from the Hall trade.


Not really
RazWild a aimé ceci.
21 janv. à 7 h 47
#24
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 2,155
Mentions "j'aime": 813
Quoting: Ledge_And_Dairy
This is strange because I am almost always the one arguing your side. Maybe you value Addison too high? I'm also assuming Minnesota is dumping cap here to make it work

Hall trade returned a 1st + Merkley + Bahl
Duchene traded for a 1st and a conditional resign 1st, as well as Abramov
Assuming the 2nd was the difference between Miller and Namestnikov, McDonagh returned 1st + Howden + Hajek
Stastny trade returned 1st + Foley (he was playing really well in NCAA at the time)
Rick Nash trade returned 1st + Lindgren (and more)
Iginla trade returned 1st + 2 top NCAA prospects.

Again I think this is a difference in perspectives on Addison. Maybe you are right on Lambos though but Addison is in his D+4 year and playing ok


It was more about Lambos than Addison, Lambos was just drafted in the 1st, So it sounded more like the ask being two x 1st and a 2nd
(fair enough on Addison, he was a Pens draft pick so I probably have a bit more attachment to him then other people)

the point was more that I couldn't see the return on Hertl/Pavs/Giroux being more than a 1st & 2nd or 1st & (not top) prospect
(Historically that seems to be the price)
Ledge_And_Dairy et RazWild a aimé ceci.
21 janv. à 8 h 18
#25
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2016
Messages: 12,834
Mentions "j'aime": 2,775
Giroux is reportedly gonna cost a 1st + a conditional 2nd + a prospect and I would assume that prospect is to be a decent one
RazWild a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Supprimer une option
Soumettre le sondage