SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

deadline sell

Créé par: Braisman7
Équipe: 2022-23 Predators de Nashville
Date de création initiale: 2 févr. 2023
Publié: 2 févr. 2023
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Transactions
1.
2.
NSH
  1. Johnsson, Andreas
  2. Choix de 2e ronde en 2023 (NJD)
  3. Choix de 4e ronde en 2023 (NJD)
3.
NSH
  1. Greenway, Jordan
  2. Choix de 1e ronde en 2023 (MIN)
MIN
  1. Granlund, Mikael
Détails additionnels:
Center Kaprizov and Zucc
4.
5.
NSH
  1. Choix de 2e ronde en 2023 (EDM)
Rachats de contrats
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2023
Logo de NSH
Logo de LAK
Logo de MIN
Logo de NSH
Logo de NJD
Logo de EDM
Logo de NSH
Logo de SJS
Logo de NSH
Logo de TOR
Logo de NJD
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
2024
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
2025
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
Logo de NSH
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2282 500 000 $75 381 934 $0 $1 845 000 $7 118 066 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
Logo de Predators de Nashville
8 500 000 $8 500 000 $
AG
NMC
UFA - 8
Logo de Predators de Nashville
874 125 $874 125 $
C, AD
RFA - 1
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
6 650 000 $6 650 000 $
AD
UFA - 3
Logo de Predators de Nashville
800 000 $800 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Predators de Nashville
850 833 $850 833 $ (Bonis de performance82 500 $$82K)
C
RFA - 2
Logo de Predators de Nashville
8 000 000 $8 000 000 $
AD, C
UFA - 4
Logo de Wild du Minnesota
3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 3
Logo de Kings de Los Angeles
894 167 $894 167 $ (Bonis de performance1 550 000 $$2M)
C
RFA - 2
Logo de Predators de Nashville
750 000 $750 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
Logo de Predators de Nashville
2 857 143 $2 857 143 $
C, AD
UFA - 4
Logo de Predators de Nashville
863 333 $863 333 $ (Bonis de performance212 500 $$212K)
AG, AD
RFA - 2
Logo de Kings de Los Angeles
1 350 000 $1 350 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
Logo de Devils du New Jersey
3 400 000 $3 400 000 $
AG, AD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
Logo de Predators de Nashville
9 059 000 $9 059 000 $
DG
NMC
UFA - 6
Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
DD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo de Kings de Los Angeles
5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
G
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Logo de Predators de Nashville
6 750 000 $6 750 000 $
DG
NTC
UFA - 4
Logo de Predators de Nashville
733 333 $733 333 $
DD
UFA - 1
Logo de Predators de Nashville
1 500 000 $1 500 000 $
G
UFA - 1
Logo de Predators de Nashville
2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 4
Logo de Kings de Los Angeles
2 650 000 $2 650 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 2
Logo de Predators de Nashville
900 000 $900 000 $
DG
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
2 févr. 2023 à 19 h 37
#1
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: avr. 2022
Messages: 2,615
Mentions "j'aime": 1,079
*Takes Nino and runs
2 févr. 2023 à 19 h 44
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 3,597
Mentions "j'aime": 1,589
Take out Clarke and replace him with another RHD not named Roy and it’s actually not terrible.

I still standby trading ‘23 1st would be bad but kings are getting Saros.

Ekholm’s contract would worry me though.
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
2 févr. 2023 à 19 h 48
#3
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2020
Messages: 5,306
Mentions "j'aime": 3,373
Granlund isn't worth all that and doesn't move the needle. Not to mention we can't afford him.
2 févr. 2023 à 19 h 49
#4
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,580
People have GOT to get this idea that someone has a gun pointed at us to get rid of Cal Petersen at a loss out of their head.
2 févr. 2023 à 19 h 52
#5
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2016
Messages: 1,620
Mentions "j'aime": 1,228
Vancouver accepts.
Mediumyeet a aimé ceci.
2 févr. 2023 à 19 h 52
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 7,532
Mentions "j'aime": 5,127
Quoting: KINGS67
Take out Clarke and replace him with another RHD not named Roy and it’s actually not terrible.

I still standby trading ‘23 1st would be bad but kings are getting Saros.

Ekholm’s contract would worry me though.


You're dumping a $5M goalie who's been relegated to the minors, and you're worried about Ekholm's contract?

Even without Petersen here, if you take Clarke out, NSH doesn't consider trading Saros alone for this package.
Mediumyeet et Viqsi a aimé ceci.
2 févr. 2023 à 20 h 0
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2016
Messages: 14,449
Mentions "j'aime": 6,101
Quoting: gmgb
You're dumping a $5M goalie who's been relegated to the minors, and you're worried about Ekholm's contract?

Even without Petersen here, if you take Clarke out, NSH doesn't consider trading Saros alone for this package.


Petersen's cap hit for the next 3 years:

2023-24: $3.85M (buried in AHL)
2024-25: $1M (buyout cap hit)
2025-26: $2M (buyout cap hit)

The Kings have no need to move Cal Petersen's contract.
2 févr. 2023 à 20 h 5
#8
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 3,597
Mentions "j'aime": 1,589
Quoting: gmgb
You're dumping a $5M goalie who's been relegated to the minors, and you're worried about Ekholm's contract?

Even without Petersen here, if you take Clarke out, NSH doesn't consider trading Saros alone for this package.

Kings can buy him out. They don’t need to trade him
OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
2 févr. 2023 à 20 h 55
#9
Dougie HIMilton
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: sept. 2020
Messages: 3,071
Mentions "j'aime": 1,628
I bet the Devils would happily do this
2 févr. 2023 à 21 h 21
#10
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 7,532
Mentions "j'aime": 5,127
Quoting: tkecanuck341
Petersen's cap hit for the next 3 years:

2023-24: $3.85M (buried in AHL)
2024-25: $1M (buyout cap hit)
2025-26: $2M (buyout cap hit)


Yikes. And you're fine with that?

Quoting: OldNYIfan
People have GOT to get this idea that someone has a gun pointed at us to get rid of Cal Petersen at a loss out of their head.


Adding a #2 defenseman and a goalie who'll be getting Hart votes is a loss somehow?
2 févr. 2023 à 21 h 23
#11
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2020
Messages: 5,306
Mentions "j'aime": 3,373
Quoting: gmgb
Yikes. And you're fine with that?


Maybe it's because my team has four years of 12-15M in dead cap to swallow, but two years of 1-2M in dead cap is literally nothing. Not even remotely a concern.
2 févr. 2023 à 21 h 37
#12
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,580
Quoting: gmgb
Adding a #2 defenseman and a goalie who'll be getting Hart votes is a loss somehow?

Losing Turcotte, the 2023 first and Clarke is a loss, yes.
I wouldn't trade Clarke for Ekholm, but I would trade Turcotte and the first for Saros. The rest of the package has positive value, if not majorly significant.
2 févr. 2023 à 21 h 47
#13
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 7,532
Mentions "j'aime": 5,127
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Losing Turcotte, the 2023 first and Clarke is a loss, yes.
I wouldn't trade Clarke for Ekholm, but I would trade Turcotte and the first for Saros. The rest of the package has positive value, if not majorly significant.


Turcotte and a 1st isn't going to get you Saros. Walker isn't enough for Ekholm. Lemieux is a UFA - he doesn't have any value to a team doing a deadline sell-off. Petersen has considerable negative value, even if LA fans seem fine with riding/buying out his contract. Without Clarke in the mix, there's nothing here for NSH to keep negotiations going.
Mediumyeet et Viqsi a aimé ceci.
2 févr. 2023 à 21 h 54
#14
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,580
Quoting: gmgb
Turcotte and a 1st isn't going to get you Saros. Walker isn't enough for Ekholm. Lemieux is a UFA - he doesn't have any value to a team doing a deadline sell-off. Petersen has considerable negative value, even if LA fans seem fine with riding/buying out his contract. Without Clarke in the mix, there's nothing here for NSH to keep negotiations going.

It feels to me like you're responding to my friend @Kings67, not me. My original statement was about trading Petersen at a loss, which you conflated into something about Ekholm and Saros.
2 févr. 2023 à 22 h 7
#15
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 7,532
Mentions "j'aime": 5,127
Quoting: OldNYIfan
It feels to me like you're responding to my friend Kings67, not me. My original statement was about trading Petersen at a loss, which you conflated into something about Ekholm and Saros.


No I was responding to your last post. That's why I quoted it, in my response. You spoke of what you would and wouldn't trade for Ekholm and Saros, and I argued your post from NSH's perspective.

Yes, your first post in the thread was about trading Petersen at a loss, which was a curious statement, as LA was getting two players of considerable value in the OP's proposal.
Mediumyeet a aimé ceci.
2 févr. 2023 à 22 h 34
#16
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2016
Messages: 14,449
Mentions "j'aime": 6,101
Quoting: gmgb
Yikes. And you're fine with that?


Yup perfectly fine with that, especially if the alternative is trading away a huge package of players and prospects to dump him.

I can't name a single player in the NHL that I'd trade a 1st, Clarke, and Turcotte for. Dahlin is close, but still no.
2 févr. 2023 à 22 h 36
#17
Once a Kings Fan Too
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2018
Messages: 39,662
Mentions "j'aime": 24,580
Quoting: gmgb
No I was responding to your last post. That's why I quoted it, in my response. You spoke of what you would and wouldn't trade for Ekholm and Saros, and I argued your post from NSH's perspective.

Yes, your first post in the thread was about trading Petersen at a loss, which was a curious statement, as LA was getting two players of considerable value in the OP's proposal.

We're still talking at cross-purposes. Both of my posts sought to make the point that the trade proposal shown represents trading Petersen at a loss. I specifically said what I think we should trade Clarke, Turcotte and the first for, so your counter-opinion is irrelevant to how we view the transaction. To put it another way, the fact that you wouldn't trade Saros for Turcotte and the first (neither would I in your position, for that matter) is irrelevant to how we feel about having Clarke in the deal which, as you and I both know, is ONLY because Petersen is in there. Your last post mentioned Walker and Lemieux, both of whom are also irrelevant to my point, but are in your mind because Kings67 said that we would consider the deal without Clarke but with Durzi or Spence or Grans added. That wasn't me. The reason why I said I would trade Turcotte and the first for Saros but not Clarke for Ekholm was to make the point that the underlying justification for this proposal is the idea that we want (to the point of having) to get rid of Petersen. We don't. Your offhand comment to the effect that acquiring Saros and Ekholm could hardly be considered a loss ignores our side of the proposal. Finally, the proposal isn't Petersen for Saros and Ekholm, so your last sentence is just silly.
2 févr. 2023 à 23 h 2
#18
westleysnipez
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2022
Messages: 1,368
Mentions "j'aime": 586
Quoting: audiodave
Vancouver accepts.


No way, Canucks were already tricked into taking an extended, larger cap by Arizona with the Eriksson for OEL deal. Take out Myers and Johansen and VAN accepts.
2 févr. 2023 à 23 h 23
#19
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2016
Messages: 1,620
Mentions "j'aime": 1,228
Quoting: westleysnipez
No way, Canucks were already tricked into taking an extended, larger cap by Arizona with the Eriksson for OEL deal. Take out Myers and Johansen and VAN accepts.


Johansen's contract is the same length as Boeser's, a little bit higher cap hit but Fabbro shouldn't cost too much to extend.
Mediumyeet a aimé ceci.
3 févr. 2023 à 0 h 32
#20
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 7,532
Mentions "j'aime": 5,127
Modifié 3 févr. 2023 à 1 h 27
Quoting: OldNYIfan
We're still talking at cross-purposes. Both of my posts sought to make the point that the trade proposal shown represents trading Petersen at a loss. I specifically said what I think we should trade Clarke, Turcotte and the first for, so your counter-opinion is irrelevant to how we view the transaction. To put it another way, the fact that you wouldn't trade Saros for Turcotte and the first (neither would I in your position, for that matter) is irrelevant to how we feel about having Clarke in the deal which, as you and I both know, is ONLY because Petersen is in there. Your last post mentioned Walker and Lemieux, both of whom are also irrelevant to my point, but are in your mind because Kings67 said that we would consider the deal without Clarke but with Durzi or Spence or Grans added. That wasn't me. The reason why I said I would trade Turcotte and the first for Saros but not Clarke for Ekholm was to make the point that the underlying justification for this proposal is the idea that we want (to the point of having) to get rid of Petersen. We don't. Your offhand comment to the effect that acquiring Saros and Ekholm could hardly be considered a loss ignores our side of the proposal. Finally, the proposal isn't Petersen for Saros and Ekholm, so your last sentence is just silly.



I've reread the entire thread, and I'm still not sure where all your confusion is stemming from. I feel my posts have been clear and coherent, about what my thoughts on this proposal are, and who I've been replying to when I've rebutted other opinions. I'm not trying to be rude when I say this, but I can't say the same for what you're attempting to convey in this post.

You're making some assumptions here about what I'm thinking that aren't accurate (the "you and I both know.." and "but are in your mind because ..." points). I'd argue about the OP's intentions in making a Preds AGM titled Deadline Sell where LA is one of the buyers on NSH's players, as well ["the underlying justification for this proposal is the idea that we want (to the point of having) to get rid of Petersen"].

Regardless of what you're trying to say here, the message failed to get through to me. I don't think there's any point in you trying to clarify it, or for us to continue the conversation. We've both been on CF for awhile, and have had plenty of civil interactions in the past. The amount of condescension in your last post isn't something I'm used to seeing from you. It's surprising, unappreciated, and frankly unjustified.

Suffice to say, neither of us would accept the OP's proposal, for our respective team. Enjoy the rest of your night.
3 févr. 2023 à 0 h 37
#21
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2020
Messages: 3,610
Mentions "j'aime": 1,318
Quoting: OldNYIfan
People have GOT to get this idea that someone has a gun pointed at us to get rid of Cal Petersen at a loss out of their head.


I mean he's a 5million dollar goalie playing in the minors. If kings are trading for a goalie he is absolutely considered a cap dump in the deal and likely a necessary piece to make the cap work in this flat cap era.
3 févr. 2023 à 0 h 49
#22
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: oct. 2020
Messages: 3,610
Mentions "j'aime": 1,318
Quoting: westleysnipez
No way, Canucks were already tricked into taking an extended, larger cap by Arizona with the Eriksson for OEL deal. Take out Myers and Johansen and VAN accepts.


Quoting: audiodave
Johansen's contract is the same length as Boeser's, a little bit higher cap hit but Fabbro shouldn't cost too much to extend.


I would certainly consider it. Johansen while expensive would be a really nice defensively responsible 3C to have. Only an extra 1.335mil over Boeser and I'd take the potential of adding another youngish RHD in Fabbro for that price.
3 févr. 2023 à 2 h 32
#23
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2022
Messages: 139
Mentions "j'aime": 46
Quoting: westleysnipez
No way, Canucks were already tricked into taking an extended, larger cap by Arizona with the Eriksson for OEL deal. Take out Myers and Johansen and VAN accepts.

I understand your point. It feels like VAN has made these types of deals for 10yrs, and rarely has cap pace or flexibility.
Yet I would accept this. It’s pretty close to a wash, but adding a centre and getting some new faces is appealing to me.
Mediumyeet a aimé ceci.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage