SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

TOR, CBJ and MTL Trades

Créé par: KyBull
Équipe: 2017-18 Avalanche du Colorado
Date de création initiale: 1 sept. 2017
Publié: 1 sept. 2017
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
RFAANSCAP HIT
22 250 000 $
Transactions
1.
COL
  1. Dermott, Travis
  2. van Riemsdyk, James
  3. Choix de 2e ronde en 2018 (TOR)
2.
COL
  1. Carlsson, Gabriel
  2. Murray, Ryan
  3. Choix de 1e ronde en 2018 (CBJ)
3.
COL
  1. Juulsen, Noah
  2. Morrow, Joe
  3. Choix de 2e ronde en 2018 (MTL)
MTL
  1. van Riemsdyk, James
  2. Choix de 4e ronde en 2018 (COL)
Rachats de contrats
Transactions impliquant une retenue de salaire
Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
2018
Logo de COL
Logo de CBJ
Logo de COL
Logo de TOR
Logo de MTL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
2019
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
2020
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
Logo de COL
TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
2375 000 000 $61 083 094 $0 $1 662 500 $13 916 906 $
Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
5 571 429 $5 571 429 $
AG, C
UFA - 4
6 300 000 $6 300 000 $
C
UFA - 6
894 167 $894 167 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
AD, C
UFA - 2
4 750 000 $4 750 000 $
C, AG
M-NTC
UFA - 3
3 937 500 $3 937 500 $
C, AG
UFA - 2
885 833 $885 833 $ (Bonis de performance662 500 $$662K)
C
UFA - 3
741 666 $741 666 $ (Bonis de performance75 000 $$75K)
AD, AG
UFA - 2
925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance75 000 $$75K)
C, AD
UFA - 2
1 400 000 $1 400 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 2
2 400 000 $2 400 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
2 500 000 $2 500 000 $
C, AG, AD
UFA - 1
875 000 $875 000 $
AD, AG
UFA - 1
1 000 000 $1 000 000 $
AG, AD
UFA - 1
925 000 $925 000 $
C, AG
UFA - 2
Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
2 825 000 $2 825 000 $
DG
UFA - 1
6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
DD
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 6
5 900 000 $5 900 000 $
G
UFA - 2
894 166 $894 166 $
DG
UFA - 3
750 000 $750 000 $
DG
UFA - 1
2 750 000 $2 750 000 $
G
UFA - 1
2 250 000 $2 250 000 $
DG/DD
UFA - 2
925 000 $925 000 $
D
RFA - 2
650 000 $650 000 $
DD
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
1 sept. 2017 à 13 h 8
#1
TML On The Rise!
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2017
Messages: 385
Mentions "j'aime": 59
I honestly think Toronto would do that trade in a heartbeat.
goldie078 a aimé ceci.
1 sept. 2017 à 13 h 54
#2
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2016
Messages: 2,012
Mentions "j'aime": 556
Montreal needs a top center or a top defenseman.... One of each of these are involved, but not to Montreal which gets another winger on a team already deep on LW....
1 sept. 2017 à 14 h 5
#3
Thomas
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: août 2017
Messages: 72
Mentions "j'aime": 4
Your JVR trade with Toronto fetches a lower value then with Montreal...... Toronto would never give up Dermott AND JVR for Barrie.
1 sept. 2017 à 14 h 33
#4
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 1,363
Mentions "j'aime": 144
Sorry Tomcas, but I do agree with Laynious that Toronto would definitely make that move. I also however agree with Robb, that this doesn't address Montreal's needs in anyway! (but should add. . . . "WHO CARES")!
goldie078 a aimé ceci.
1 sept. 2017 à 14 h 52
#5
Démarrer sujet
Avaholic66
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2016
Messages: 205
Mentions "j'aime": 19
Tomcas: Based on the term and age of Barrie, I say Toronto absolutely makes that deal. As for Montreal, I agree they need a center, but they will not get that this year (Taveras next year) but they could use a Radulov replacement to supplement their offense for this season - maybe take away Morrow, but I still feel it's fair.
1 sept. 2017 à 15 h 25
#6
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2016
Messages: 115
Mentions "j'aime": 12
I would do that for CBJ.
1 sept. 2017 à 15 h 52
#7
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mars 2017
Messages: 493
Mentions "j'aime": 30
If you've only watched a single team for one season and have no clue about comparable players -- try Own The Puck

That way, you won't believe the whole world is unfair and imagine you're losing something for nothing

Your team's prospect with a 3rd pair ceiling < proven NHL 3rd pair < Barrie (who scores like a #1 D, but defends like a #5 D)
1 sept. 2017 à 16 h 54
#8
LongtimeLeafsufferer
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 60,162
Mentions "j'aime": 23,065
I can't imagine Montreal giving up any of their future for one year of JVR. As a Leaf, I dislike the Barrie deal. Yea value wise it might be more than fair. But the Leafs need cap space next year. And as goldie078 pointed out while Barrie can be a scorer, he has marginal defence. Leafs can score , had the # 2 PP, finding competent Dmen costs less than 5.5m a year, without giving up assets.
Billius a aimé ceci.
1 sept. 2017 à 17 h 43
#9
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 1,363
Mentions "j'aime": 144
Quoting: palhal
I can't imagine Montreal giving up any of their future for one year of JVR. As a Leaf, I dislike the Barrie deal. Yea value wise it might be more than fair. But the Leafs need cap space next year. And as goldie078 pointed out while Barrie can be a scorer, he has marginal defence. Leafs can score , had the # 2 PP, finding competent Dmen costs less than 5.5m a year, without giving up assets.[/qu

Pal, Leafs have no cap issues next year at all. Loads of room. The only issue is the following year when both Marner and Matthiews come due. At that point you evaluate if Gardiner, and /or Barrie even fit your needs. Maybe before that, you move Gardiner, and if not, Barrie has no restrictions on his contract which would only have a year left on it! Leafs PP still doesn't have a true D quarterback, unless you think Zaitsev, (and it is possible) can take that role over..Both Gardiner, and Reilly don't work in that role. It is also possible that 2-3 years down the line Liljegren assumes that role. You are getting a top 2 for the one year of JVR, and a prosepect at least 4-5 down the depth chart.
1 sept. 2017 à 18 h 20
#10
LongtimeLeafsufferer
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juill. 2015
Messages: 60,162
Mentions "j'aime": 23,065
Doug, well the Leafs do have cap issues especially for performance bonuses. They Leafs want to zero carry, in summer of 2019 when he times for big signings. Marner, Matthews, Kapanen, Gardiner
Regarding Barrie's value. Again it's subjective. IMO no way is a 5.5m Dmen. I'd easily would like to have 870,000 Dermot and the extra 4.6m. And the PP argument. Gee, the Leafs have done quite we'll with rookie Zaitsev, Carrick along with Gardiner and Reilly. And Nylander might be a right point man, Again it's subjective. but I think you are wildly incorrect, if you think your are getting a top 2 Dman.
OK even he is a 4/5, I'd rather keep Dermot, have cap flexibility, either for performance bonuses or another player or yes have JVR for one year.
1 sept. 2017 à 18 h 22
#11
Leafs Fan
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2017
Messages: 324
Mentions "j'aime": 24
Quoting: palhal
I can't imagine Montreal giving up any of their future for one year of JVR. As a Leaf, I dislike the Barrie deal. Yea value wise it might be more than fair. But the Leafs need cap space next year. And as goldie078 pointed out while Barrie can be a scorer, he has marginal defence. Leafs can score , had the # 2 PP, finding competent Dmen costs less than 5.5m a year, without giving up assets.


Palhal, I think you are right about the Cap. I want to see the bonus overage from 2017-18 cleared up next year, as well as next year's bonuses, before the big cap crunch comes in 2019-20 and that means not using Horton's LTIR. So the cap is tight.
On the other hand, Barrie doesn't cost too much more than JVR, so they could probably shoe horn him in.
Still not sure it's the trade I would want, due to your point about Barrie's defensive side.

EDIT: crossed posts with your last one.
1 sept. 2017 à 19 h 41
#12
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: juin 2015
Messages: 1,363
Mentions "j'aime": 144
Quoting: palhal
Doug, well the Leafs do have cap issues especially for performance bonuses. They Leafs want to zero carry, in summer of 2019 when he times for big signings. Marner, Matthews, Kapanen, Gardiner
Regarding Barrie's value. Again it's subjective. IMO no way is a 5.5m Dmen. I'd easily would like to have 870,000 Dermot and the extra 4.6m. And the PP argument. Gee, the Leafs have done quite we'll with rookie Zaitsev, Carrick along with Gardiner and Reilly. And Nylander might be a right point man, Again it's subjective. but I think you are wildly incorrect, if you think your are getting a top 2 Dman.
OK even he is a 4/5, I'd rather keep Dermot, have cap flexibility, either for performance bonuses or another player or yes have JVR for one year.


Pal you know that I always enjoy solid criticism. But my point would continue to be that Dermott is at least a year or 2 away and at best replaces Gardiner as a 3/4. I like Zaitsev and think his numbers will continue to grow. I think Gardiner's advanced stats last year are a mirage and can't be sustained and thus the need for another offensive Dman. I think Carrick lost the confidence of Babcock late in the year and as such won't be used in PP situations. Nylander if used on the point would likely move to the left side used in conjunction with Zaitsev as the QB. Barrie is an undersized Dman, of which we have lots but $ wise fits within the system no matter the bonuses and overages for the next 2 years and easily if Gardiner gets moved and Rosen or Borgman (both I consider ahead of Dermott) grab a spot.
1 sept. 2017 à 20 h 47
#13
Avatar de l'utilisateur
Rejoint: mai 2015
Messages: 225
Mentions "j'aime": 13
I have like zero interest in Tyson Barrie.

He is the exact opposite of what we are looking for.
 
Répondre
To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
Question:
Options:
Ajouter une option
Soumettre le sondage