Forums/Armchair-GM

MAF will be a wild and they will give us a first

Créé par: Kyle_Davidson
Date de création initiale: 21 mars 2022
Publié: 21 mars 2022
Équipe: 2021-22 Blackhawks de Chicago
Explications
I admit the title is probably unnecessarily provoking but I wanted to test out this idea because I think it’s a neat little scenario.
Transactions
1.
CHI
  1. 2022 4e round pick (MIN)
  2. 2022 1e round pick (MIN)
If the season ended today the hawks draft picks would be 8th in each round. Conversely the wild would be drafting 23rd in each round assuming they don’t make it to the WCF or SCF. If the hawks tried to build a MAF package around upgrading their second to Minny’ s first would they bite on that? I think they should* because the difference between the picks as it currently stands is 17.

*This trade will only improve the wilds record (making their draft pick later) and make the hawks record worse (meaning their 2nd will get closer to the first round).



The 4th is included for the 3.5 in cap retention.
MIN
  1. Fleury, Marc-André (3 500 000 $ retained)
  2. 2022 2e round pick (CHI)
2.
CHI
  1. 2022 2e round pick (STL)
  2. 2022 6e round pick (NYR)
Better of the two 2nds.
NYR
  1. De Haan, Calvin
  2. Carpenter, Ryan
3.
CHI
  1. Bokk, Dominik
  2. 2023 2e round pick (CAR)
CAR
  1. Kubalik, Dominik (1 850 000 $ retained)
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
  • Marc-André Fleury: 3 500 000 $ (100%)
  • Dominik Kubalik: 1 850 000 $ (50%)
  • Olli Määttä: 750 108 $ (18%)
  • Marc-André Fleury: 3 500 000 $ (50%)
ANNÉE DE REPÊCHAGERONDE 1RONDE 2RONDE 3RONDE 4RONDE 5RONDE 6RONDE 7
2022
Logo de MIN
Logo de STL
Logo de EDM
Logo de TOR
Logo de VGK
Logo de MIN
Logo de CHI
Logo de CBJ
Logo de NYR
Logo de CHI
2023
Logo de CHI
Logo de TBL
Logo de CHI
Logo de TBL
Logo de CAR
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
2024
Logo de CHI
Logo de TBL
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
Logo de CHI
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2281 500 000 $69 096 713 $452 439 $3 805 000 $12 403 287 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de CHI
DeBrincat, Alex
6 400 000 $
AG, AD
RFA - 2
Logo de CHI
Strome, Dylan
3 000 000 $
C, AG
RFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Kane, Patrick
10 500 000 $
AD
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo de CHI
Reichel, Lukas
925 000 $
AG, C
RFA - 3
Logo de CHI
Toews, Jonathan
10 500 000 $
C
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo de CHI
Raddysh, Taylor
758 333 $
AD
RFA - 3
Logo de CHI
Katchouk, Boris
758 333 $
AG
RFA - 3
Logo de CHI
Dach, Kirby
925 000 $
C, AD
RFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Kurashev, Philipp
842 500 $
AG, C
RFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Lafferty, Sam
750 000 $
AD, C, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Entwistle, Mackenzie
811 667 $
AD, C
RFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Johnson, Reese
880 833 $
AD, C
RFA - 1
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de CHI
Galvas, Jakub
867 500 $
DG
RFA - 2
Logo de CHI
Jones, Seth
5 400 000 $
DD
NTC
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Lankinen, Kevin
800 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
McCabe, Jake
4 000 000 $
DG/DD
NTC
UFA - 4
Logo de CHI
Jones, Caleb
850 000 $
DG/DD
RFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Delia, Collin
1 000 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Stillman, Riley
1 350 000 $
DG
RFA - 3
Logo de CHI
Mitchell, Ian
925 000 $
DD
RFA - 2
Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
Logo de CHI
Borgström, Henrik
1 000 000 $
C
RFA - 2
Logo de CHI
Johnson, Tyler
5 000 000 $
AD, C, AG
NTC
UFA - 3
Logo de CHI
Shaw, Andrew
3 900 000 $
C, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Gustafsson, Erik
800 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Murphy, Connor
3 850 000 $
DD
UFA - 1
Logo de CHI
Khaira, Jujhar
975 000 $
C, AG
UFA - 2

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
21 mars à 1 h 58
#1
Banni
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2022
Messages: 120
Mentions "j'aime": 28
Guerin isn't giving a 1st no matter what you think. It's been made clear he's not parting with a 1st for a rental especially a G. So no
21 mars à 1 h 59
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2021
Messages: 301
Mentions "j'aime": 78
All teams say no
21 mars à 2 h 13
#3
Démarrer sujet
Chicago GM
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2018
Messages: 8,342
Mentions "j'aime": 4,294
Quoting: NathanJoseph
Guerin isn't giving a 1st no matter what you think. It's been made clear he's not parting with a 1st for a rental especially a G. So no


He’s basically getting a first back, or at least in 15-20 when this is a 40 team league it will be a first.
21 mars à 2 h 17
#4
Banni
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2022
Messages: 120
Mentions "j'aime": 28
Quoting: Kyle_Davidson
He’s basically getting a first back, or at least in 15-20 when this is a 40 team league it will be a first.


He's not getting a 1st back. You don't know what thay 1st is. Or what that 2nd is. Even than Guerin say no. He's not getting rid of a 1st and it been made abundantly clear. Not with judd brackett aboard
21 mars à 3 h 14
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2020
Messages: 3,446
Mentions "j'aime": 2,682
Modifié 21 mars à 3 h 35
Here's your issue.

You are banking on something that doesn't carry weight. You are saying the Wild should be willing to give up their 1st round pick for Fluery because the difference between 23rd overall and 40th overall is minimal.

It absolutely does.

That's the difference between a Carson Lambos... a top 4 potential dman, versus a Jack Peart.. bottom 4 potential dman.

-------------

But it's okay, we should happily give up a 1st round pick and drop 17 spots in the draft for 2 months of a goalie who hasn't been that much better than Talbot this year because, reasons. I mean, the Wild don't need their 1st at all in a deep draft this year because they'll have FOUR 2nd rounders this year to offset the difference and aren't going to be in cap hell the next three years either. Oh, hooray. What a fantastic deal.... Guerin would be an idiot to turn this down!!! /sarcasm 🙄

The facts are thus.

1) Fluery's play this year means his value is barely worth a 3rd, maybe a 4th. But given the fact it's in division, fine a 2nd round pick is the cost of inflation for that.

And a 2nd is more than fair for Fluery, especially at this point. Davidson did his bargaining position no favors by playing Fluery last night.

2) Davidson doesn't have a leg to stand on in the first place demanding a 1st back. He has no leverage. None. Fluery will go where he wants. And the only team he's willing to go to is offering a 2nd for him.

That's his price. Not a 1st, but a 2nd.

3) Fluery was acquired for nothing. A 2nd in return for him is already a hefty return on Chicago's investment. Don't push your luck, and get what you can. Because it's already a win for Chicago.
EccE a aimé ceci.
21 mars à 9 h 22
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2017
Messages: 7,485
Mentions "j'aime": 4,085
Quoting: RazWild
Here's your issue.

You are banking on something that doesn't carry weight. You are saying the Wild should be willing to give up their 1st round pick for Fluery because the difference between 23rd overall and 40th overall is minimal.

It absolutely does.

That's the difference between a Carson Lambos... a top 4 potential dman, versus a Jack Peart.. bottom 4 potential dman.

-------------

But it's okay, we should happily give up a 1st round pick and drop 17 spots in the draft for 2 months of a goalie who hasn't been that much better than Talbot this year because, reasons. I mean, the Wild don't need their 1st at all in a deep draft this year because they'll have FOUR 2nd rounders this year to offset the difference and aren't going to be in cap hell the next three years either. Oh, hooray. What a fantastic deal.... Guerin would be an idiot to turn this down!!! /sarcasm 🙄

The facts are thus.

1) Fluery's play this year means his value is barely worth a 3rd, maybe a 4th. But given the fact it's in division, fine a 2nd round pick is the cost of inflation for that.

And a 2nd is more than fair for Fluery, especially at this point. Davidson did his bargaining position no favors by playing Fluery last night.

2) Davidson doesn't have a leg to stand on in the first place demanding a 1st back. He has no leverage. None. Fluery will go where he wants. And the only team he's willing to go to is offering a 2nd for him.

That's his price. Not a 1st, but a 2nd.

3) Fluery was acquired for nothing. A 2nd in return for him is already a hefty return on Chicago's investment. Don't push your luck, and get what you can. Because it's already a win for Chicago.


1. Agree to disagree between wild fans and hawks fans if you don't think 17 spots in the draft is worth Flower

2. You clearly haven't watched flower all year if you think his play is only worth a 3rd. You need to watch the games not just look at stats. Flower single handedly carries the hawks in every game he plays in. His stats don't reflect it to the outside viewed because the hawks defence is HORRIBLE. Imagine how good he would be behind the Wild defence? Likley putting up the same numbers that WON HIM THE VEZINA last year.

3. What the hawks gave up (or didn't give up) for flower is irrelivant. It was a unique situation where vegas needed to clear the cap space desperatly, and the hawks were one of the few teams that weren't trying to tank and also could afford the full 7 mil. What we paid has nothing to do with his value now. Value is based off what other teams will pay now, not what we paid in the past. At 3.5 mil there are suitors for flower should he decide to agree to the trade
21 mars à 11 h 16
#7
Démarrer sujet
Chicago GM
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: févr. 2018
Messages: 8,342
Mentions "j'aime": 4,294
Quoting: NathanJoseph
He's not getting a 1st back. You don't know what thay 1st is. Or what that 2nd is. Even than Guerin say no. He's not getting rid of a 1st and it been made abundantly clear. Not with judd brackett aboard


Quoting: RazWild
Here's your issue.

You are banking on something that doesn't carry weight. You are saying the Wild should be willing to give up their 1st round pick for Fluery because the difference between 23rd overall and 40th overall is minimal.

It absolutely does.

That's the difference between a Carson Lambos... a top 4 potential dman, versus a Jack Peart.. bottom 4 potential dman.

-------------

But it's okay, we should happily give up a 1st round pick and drop 17 spots in the draft for 2 months of a goalie who hasn't been that much better than Talbot this year because, reasons. I mean, the Wild don't need their 1st at all in a deep draft this year because they'll have FOUR 2nd rounders this year to offset the difference and aren't going to be in cap hell the next three years either. Oh, hooray. What a fantastic deal.... Guerin would be an idiot to turn this down!!! /sarcasm 🙄

The facts are thus.

1) Fluery's play this year means his value is barely worth a 3rd, maybe a 4th. But given the fact it's in division, fine a 2nd round pick is the cost of inflation for that.

And a 2nd is more than fair for Fluery, especially at this point. Davidson did his bargaining position no favors by playing Fluery last night.

2) Davidson doesn't have a leg to stand on in the first place demanding a 1st back. He has no leverage. None. Fluery will go where he wants. And the only team he's willing to go to is offering a 2nd for him.

That's his price. Not a 1st, but a 2nd.

3) Fluery was acquired for nothing. A 2nd in return for him is already a hefty return on Chicago's investment. Don't push your luck, and get what you can. Because it's already a win for Chicago.


Return for MAF supposedly a 2nd that can upgrade to a first, don’t know conditions
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage