Quoting: wolsen92
1. Why would the flyers Trade Cutter to the pens or any metro team in general
2. Drysdale has value, more value than JG. Not saying that JG does not have value, but all of NHLGMS would not trade Drysdale for JG, or Cutter for JG. Blue Chip for Blue Chip thats it.
3. JG is not a blue chip guy, he is an accessory piece on an expiring contract who has played with Sid his whole life. He is a great goal scorer, but not worth Drysdale or Cutter on an expiring contract with NO guarentee that he will resign with that team. Not to mention he is 29-30 years old and gonna ask for more than 7 years
4. Say what you want about Drysdale being "damaged goods" he has played in the NHL before, I think anybody on that ANA could use a "change of scenery". Zegras is dealing with the same issues, do you think he is damaged goods? Does not mean he does not have value, rumors had it the Ducks added the second to outbid another team, as soon as Drysdale was in trade talks, the flyers knew they were gonna get him.
5. I do think cutter is a great player, but he also has NEVER played an NHL game and he is a WINGER, not a center, hence why the ducks got him to be a winger
6. 21 year old Puck Moving RHD who can skate better than most forwards are never available ever, flyers gave up value in cutter, but got value back. IT was kept quiet that he wanted out, many NHL GMs did not know this until after the trade.
7. When there are 18-20 teams interested in Cutter, the flyers did not settle.
8. If Drysdale hits his ceiling and becomes Zach Werenski or Cale Makar, it does not matter what Cutter is, Teams would kill for Werenski or Cale Makar, but they cant develop or attain them. Ducks have a deep D pipeline, Flyers needed a 1D....
I have my flaws with the Philadelphia Flyers, but they did not settle or lose this trade.
1. because its a matter of return on assets. Yes I know, Pens are a rival.... but you do the best for YOUR team as a GM even if it means dealing with them.
2. No Drysdale does not have more value than Jake. That is your misjudgment. Just because a player is younger does not mean they are "better".
Drysdale is/was a struggling player in ANA. Notice the low return on the trade. PIT would never accept Drysdale and a 2nd for Jake. Forget about that. The offer is too low. Its like taking Kakko and a 1st from the rangers. The answer is NO.
3. Your valuation of jake is wrong. The whole "he played with sid he has no "real" value of his own, is just you being a hater. I can give you a whole list of guys who couldn't put up goals at a 35-40 goal pace on sids wing. So that ends the conversation right there. His contract is what it is, we know nothing of it other than rumors. In the end finding guys who can net 40 aren't easy to come by and guys with that level of talent play will in to their 30s. It's not out of place to say Jake could play well to 34 or 35. Many guys do. It's not like the wheels are coming off at 31. So yes you may have 1-2 bad years on a 7 year deal. That's just the buyers tax on a 40 goal guy and you get that all the time.
4. again rumor.... I don't care about rumors. Click bait is everywhere with desperate hockey nerds on the internet willing to click anything. As far as Zegras is concerned is it going to be a multiple year slide like Drysdale. The guy played bad or was injured for 3 years. If you get the same out of Zegras yes his value will drop.
5. It makes no difference if he is a center or a winger. That has nothing to do with the WHOLE conversation or his value as a prospect here.
6. 1 it was not quiet that he wanted out. It was reported on actual hockey news sites like sprotsnet. 2. You keep saying this, 21 year old puck moving RHD who can skate. .. you can skate all day if you can't play hockey for crap you have no value. He bled goals all over the ice and it's not like his point production was high. He was maxing out at 4 goals per year. With a bunch of assists a portion of them being 2nd.
You are vastly over valuing a player. He's not freaking EK in his prime or even now that he's older. He's just not that good. Hell in PHL he's bleeding more goals than he's got points.
7. The flyers settled.
8. If pigs could fly and other ramblings...... Please don't use him and Cale Makar in the same sentence. You are reaching very far on this. 3 years of injured or bad play in ANA. It is what it is. We are dealing in realities not hopes and dreams. 35-40 goal scorers have more value than poor performing young players. Being "young" does not make you the more valuable piece. It's what you DO on the ice that gives you value. Drysdale is no where near a 1D.
again they settled. I'm not saying they had a choice. It is what it is. My whole point to this thread is....IF the penguins would have know they were going to move Jake......this could have looked different......VALUE wise.....it makes more sense for both teams. As stated in my 1st reply, it's bare bones to not over complicate the issue but to throw the idea out there.
You know, more interesting conversation then the whole list of HORRIBLE acgm's on this board.
This is a convo that did not exist prior as no one on here thought of looking back at and how it might have worked. Clearly from comment it would have been a 3 way trade, where Jake geos to one team, a young defenseman goes to PHL (a better one than what they got in Drysdale) and Cutter to the penguins.
But you are hell bent on not looking back at the possibility and instead insist that somehow Drysdale was some great reward for losing a blue chip prospect. He wasn't.
Most people agree that ANA won the trade.