SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

DakotaMermis4Norris

Membre depuis
13 févr. 2018
Équipe favorite
Devils du New Jersey
Deuxième équipe favorite
Golden Knights de Vegas
Messages dans les forums
562
Messages par jour
0.2
Forum: Armchair-GM11 nov. 2019 à 16 h 57
Sujet: lou lamoriello
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div><a href="/users/glc_0908" target="_blank">@glc_0908</a> I actually think bridge deals can be a good thing when properly used. I agree with your other comments about AM. Dubas gave AM all the cards, but that's because Dubas caved with Nylander. That's my opinion <a href="/users/LoganOllivier" target="_blank"><a href="/users/LoganOllivier" target="_blank">@LoganOllivier</a></a>. it's ok to have different opinions.

***EDIT*** <a href="/users/LoganOllivier" target="_blank"><a href="/users/LoganOllivier" target="_blank">@LoganOllivier</a></a> the answer...to me...as I mentioned earlier, was a bridge deal that RESULTED at the end of the bridge at a $12.5-$13M contract for his next contract. Something that recognized he's not as good as McDavid, but something that will mean he's likely to have the largest contract in the future. Something JUST higher than McDavid, but you can get a Cap hit around $8M.</div></div>

yeah brayden point is an example as was kucherov,

edit: the reason i don't like bridge deals is i'd rather take the risk and wind up with a mackinnon contract as opposed to paying someone like marner. If i'm dubas the 8x8 is a justifiable risk for marner. if it doesnt work out theres still value to be had unlike an aging ufa
Forum: Armchair-GM11 nov. 2019 à 16 h 56
Sujet: lou lamoriello
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>So your point is, Matthews should have gotten 8 and now because he didn't its screwed the Leafs because he will leave in Free Agency. Its funny that no one is answering any of my hypothetical questions about what the Leafs cap situation would be in 3 years if these guys had all signed bridge deals but instead talk about the "Fact" that Matthews is going to go out and get a max offer as an FA. Did Crosby do that when he could become an FA? Did Brent Burns? Did Kane and Toews? Ovechkin? The only high profile player to become a free agent in the past decade was Tavares. Don't you think its more likely that when Matthews contract comes up, he'll negotiate an extension with his present team? He's openly said he loves TO and wants to win here, but of course he wants to leave, everyone wants to leave to.

What is more likely that Dubas got screwed over and in 5 years, he's going to lose Matthews for nothing, or is he going to be up for a contract and resign in TO for whatever the market price is for his services.

Still though, no one has answered my questions about what the mess would be in 3 seasons had the Leafs given Matthews, Nylander and Marner bridge deals that expire around the same time that both Rielly and Andersen need new deals. In my experience, when people refuse to answer questions, its because they can't or know the answer hurts their position so they just ignore it. I think the people that like to pile on Dubas are either people that don't think beyond the present or are like the Hawks fan on here who is very influenced by what worked there which was so long ago that the entire landscape of the NHL has changed and makes that model not realistic in the current era of the NHL.</div></div>

No I explained this in the previous post - I get what you're saying in 3 years you have to pay him. My point is that's peanuts to the big picture. you get him 3 years at 10 now you have 2 million extra now, his qualifying offer is at 11, you sign him 8 @ 13 in 3 years, great. you have him in his prime and the difference is year 4 and 5 at 11.6 are now year 1 and 2 at 13 so 1.4MM higher in year 4 and 5 but you locked him up under the new cap limit for another 8 years for a difference of 3 million.

and thats 3 @10, 3@8 and you can add another 3MM to your already contending roster
Forum: Armchair-GM11 nov. 2019 à 16 h 48
Sujet: lou lamoriello
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>So you really aren't even considering anything I am saying which is pretty much what everyone on here does. I am saying that Dubas is looking at now and balancing all the needs over a long time frame because he has to. He needs to be very mindful of the future. As I have mentioned, these bridge deals you keep mentioning would have made for a lot of problems down the road. I have asked, what kind of money would TO be spending in 3 years if they bridged these guys? Your answer has been Bridge deals are better. (In not so many words)

That has been everyones response to that question. Imagine if your job is to manage whatever organization, and you take a look at all the long term financial forecasts and then say, who cares, lets do everything we can to win this year because in 3 years I'll be fired and it doesn't matter. Because that is exactly the type of planning that one would have to do to give these bridge deals to guys in TO. There are a lot of contracts that will be signed by the time Matthews and Nylander need new deals. TO knows what they are going to be paying their stars. Does Tampa know how much Point is going to cost them in 3 seasons? Nope, and if he continues to improve, that number is going to be massive. How much money does Winnipeg need to sign Laine in 2 years? Or Calgary in 3 with Tkachuk? Judging by how salaries are already rising, do you think its reasonable to expect that these recent bridge deals are going to only be the tip of the iceberg?

So what are you arguing here?</div></div>

No no no, what i'm saying and maybe im articulating poorly is AM's contract is more or less a really bad bridge deal. I hear what you're saying and I agree I hate bridge deals. I wanted zacha overpaid for an 8 year deal, i wanted nico 8 years, bratt 8 years I get it.

but theres a new tv deal coming, which means the cap is going up. torontos window is now, but since the team is so young and talented, it can stay open for the foreseeable future which is awesome. If matthews signs for 8 @12 that is better than 5 @11.5 Because he effectively closed your window at 5 years as it stands now. a 3 year bridge is better than the 5 because you will pay him earlier as an rfa and ideally lock him up at 8 following it. You lose the rfa status at 5 years, he didn't take a discount so it didn't help in the right now or the future planning. in 5 years hes getting even more than he would in 3 because hes unrestricted and by that time there will be new contracts in place under the new cap. so the 13-14 post bridge could be more like 15-17 at UFA.

There are two reasons bridge deals are good - one is current cap hit, the other is maintaining rfa stus
There are two reasons long term deals are good - lock up a piece and price certainty that in an ideal world will serve as a discount in the second half or even earlier of the contract

AM's deal has a very high cap hit and Toronto does not maintain rfa status
AM's deals is not truly long term and there isn't price certainty because hes getting open market value in year 5 which leaves you the option of rolling the dice and resigning at Free agent price, or dealing him year 5

<a href="/users/exo2769" target="_blank">@exo2769</a>
Forum: Armchair-GM11 nov. 2019 à 16 h 33
Sujet: lou lamoriello
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>So tomorrow doesn't matter then. Lets make today work and any problems that arise from these decisions can just be someone else's problem. That is definitely how most people seem to think but its a stupid way to think. Why am I saying this? Because you said a 3 year bridge deal helps the team.

How? In what way does that help? Would it give them the ability to sign some aging vet to an overpriced contract that will hurt the team as he ages al a Backes? What about after those 3 years? Because looking at what Timo Mier got, (his QO is 10 million) you'd think Matthews would have a QO in the 13 million range. How does that help the team? What about the other contracts that would be up at the same time? Andersen after next season and Rielly the same time that Matthews and Marner (who I am assuming you would want to have a 3 year deal as well) and probably Nylander as well. So what would that look like? If people with your mentality had their way, you'd likely have valuable cap space taken up by some aging vets that can't carry their contracts and you'd need probably 40% more cap space than Marner, Nylander, and Matthews are currently taking up plus Andersen and Rielly needing new deals. Not to mention, what about the likes of Sandin and Liljegren that will be coming off ELC's around that time as well.

This is why anyone who calls Dubas a bad GM are wrong, they are in all cases thinking about right now, and not at all thinking about what the landscape is going to look like in 3 years. This is Benning sort of short sighted planning. Also I don't mean to sound like I am coming down hard on you personally, I think most fans lack the patience to look beyond this season or the next, its too far away. I have always been someone who tries to anticipate whats coming next as much as whats happening now. Dubas and Pridham clearly seem to think long term as much as they do short term.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>The math behind that mentality just doesn't compute though. As I mentioned several times, lets look at what bridge deals would have looked like in TO.

Matthews 3 year deal would have been the richest of all the bridge deals handed out. His QO in 3 years would be close to 11 million. What would his long term deal be at that point? 14? That isn't at all a stretch.

What about Nylander? He signed a year before so lets say 3 years at 4.5 or 5 with the final year being worth 8, now he would need a new contract at the same time as Andersen and if he continues to play like he has been, I bet he'll have a 90 point season by the time this hypothetical deal needs to be made.

What about Marner? He would have gotten at least what Point got, so you are looking at him and Matthews needing new deals at the same time. As well as Rielly.

How much money would these 3 cost in 3 years? Especially if the new TV deal comes in high and Seattle creates extra revenue. What is all that going to look like? TO is knows what they will paying their young forwards in 2-3 years from now. They don't have any bad contracts that will gum up the works and they have a lot of flexibility since they don't have any bad contracts on the team. This is the sort of long term planning that makes Dubas smart and why all notions that he sucks at his job are just short sighted and wrong. I am not at all saying he is the end all and be all, but the point of this post was for the author to compare Dubas to Lou saying Lou would have done so much better. Lou did some good things in TO but he made a lot of mistakes that caused problems this off season and Dubas managed to not only get out from under those issues, but he improved the team as well.

I find it very funny that whenever I ask anyone "What would those bridge deals look like in 3 years" and mention Andersen and Rielly needing new contracts, the response is nothing.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div><a href="/users/LoganOllivier" target="_blank">@LoganOllivier</a>

I think the issue <a href="/users/glc_0908" target="_blank">@glc_0908</a> is making is a good one. The older Calgary failures at the beginning of the cap era...were that they didn't have any single bad contract. They just overpaid everyone about $500k. That adds up. Again, as I mentioned earlier. It's not that I can say Matthews/Marner contract are bad...but you just paid Marner higher than Kane on the expectation that someday he'll be better than Kane. OK, fine...I can see that and one day that will likely happen. Not today...not tomorrow...probably not for 3-4 years. So...is Marner's ~$11M contract today a bit of an overpayment. YES. It might be worth in in the long run, but I think we're in agreement that it's a projection into the future. maybe it has a 99.999% chance of being a good contract...maybe less? IDK you put your favorite percentage assign to it, but it isn't today.

You're argument is that there needs to be thought about the future. I agree, but my point on the mixture of contracts is that Dubas is planning for 3-4 years in the future. What about the now? Why didn't he try to bridge some of these guys? We may just have different philosophies...which is fine, but I think Matthews should have been bridged with his NEXT deal being $12.5 - $12.6M years from now. It was VERY hard for Dubas to get that done because he failed with Nylander...I'm NOT going down that road again.</div></div>


I'm not taking it personally so don't worry, i'm actually pumped to have a real conversation instead of *insert team* laughs and hangs up or starts with *insert player who isnt being traded*

But my very point I think is proved exactly by what you said to me - which is that AM's contract is in the sweetspot of "screwing" toronto. Because he walked himself to UFA at the highest possible AAV post new CBA and tv deal. He's worth the money yey but the agent beat dubas in this negotiation. by your math hes the highest bridge and comes in with a QO of 11-12 sure and sets himself up for 13-14 MM absolutely. however, at this point he's still an RFA which means you still hold the cards. You sign him for 8 years at 13-14 under the new cap regime and its still a decent contract for a dude who will one be earning his 13-14 at that time and you lock him up for his full prime.

As of now, you're in cap hell (which again i never said dubas is a bad gm quite the opposite actually, but i do think he was outmatched on his negotiations and i guarantee it wont happen again to him) and AM is going to go to the free market where hes going to see max offers because he is that good. and to keep him Toronto will have to match but this time, if they cant, they aren't getting 4 1st's and they aren't getting a trade for his rights. This is the root of the issue.
Forum: Armchair-GM11 nov. 2019 à 15 h 37
Sujet: lou lamoriello
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>I don't think a team is cap trouble when they don't have any bad contracts. Matthews, Tavares, Nylander and Marner will all earn their money, because they are indeed star players. In TO's case, bridge deals would have been terrible. In 2 years, Adnersen needs a contract, in 3 years Rielly needs a contract. If TO would have given their guys short deals like most of the other RFA's got, would have made for massive issues later on. Plus what kind of long term money would have been thrown around if they had the money to throw around? Who is even available? When you judge Dubas's work form the perspective of comparing his deals to mainly Point's contract, its both short sighted and an incorrect way to look at it. So many GM's in this league operate for this season and that's all they really seem to care about. How do I make this season a success? That is where guys make all the wrong decisions. Overpay this FA because we need a 2nd Pair LHD and when that doesn't work. Dubas hasn't done that, he has the 4th youngest team in the NHL and zero bad contracts. His tenure is still in its infancy and should be looked at from both a short term and long term. Short term, he didn't want to go with short term bridge deals, because they will without a doubt end up causing bigger problems later on. Long term, they have no bad contracts and lots of flexibility. Could he have been better? Maybe, who knows, but to say he's been terrible is just ignorant. To suggest that Lou would have been better is an absolute joke, Shanahan axing him saved this core's chances of winning together. Imagine what he would have done with Nylander's contract? He would have traded him for some vet with sand paper and used the money he saved to resign Komarov.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>Matthews is 6th in the league in scoring and is heating up. I am not sure how you can say its a terrible contract unless you think he's just a 2C which he clearly isn't. He's the best player in TO who also has Tavares, Marner, Rielly and Nylander and its not close. He's also what 22 only? There is not concern over the Matthews contract. Time and time again, stars getting star money is never a problem, depth guys getting too much is terrible and Dubas has not overpaid a depth guy once. He doesn't sign the Komarov's of the league to 4 year deals at way more than he deserves. TO is always under the microscope and everyone wants their say and unfortunately that results in way too much speculation and just talk from "Hockey Media Guys" to analyze everything and that all gets out of control.

This season its worse than ever. Take away the 2nd half of the back to backs, and TO is one of the top teams in the league in most statistical categories. The team hasn't been playing their best and the reports that follow this team are borderline bipolar. One thing goes right and people go crazy, but you still get all sorts of reports talking about all these perceived flaws that mean TO is crap. Most of these reports ignore advance stats, or results in general.

The reality of the situation is, TO is a very good team. They have been getting better and better each game, apart from the 2nd half of back to back, and at this point there are only a couple of issues that need to be sorted out.

1) The PK is really not good, I am wondering if they need to use their top guys more on the PK. Give Matthews and Tavares a chance, they can win puck battles and faceoffs.
2) Ceci almost needs to be traded, he is a very weak link on the blueline and gets scored on a lot.
3) The backup just hasn't been good enough (not entirely his fault but still no results)

If those are the only 3 things that are actually problematic, TO is in great shape.</div></div>

To reiterate my point - I think Auston Matthews is great, he is a 1C. I don't think he's McDavid, the fact of the matter is McDavid's contract is so so sooooo much better than Matthews and thats the issue I have with it. And because everything is connected it drove up marners (which again is fine because they are worth it - but signing 8x8 wouldve been much better lol).

McDavid took a contract that is great for him and helps the team.
Matthews did not take a contract that helps the team but he took a phenomenal contract for himself. A good contract would have been a 3 year bridge at significantly lower AAV with a very high QO, or 8 years at his current $'s to 12MM.

Instead his contract directly contributes to cap concerns here and now, as well as going forward. He walks himself to free agency to collect an even bigger bag. That is the issue I have with his contract and therefore Dubas's negotiating

He is the cornerstone of the franchise as you mentioned, hes the top guy. Now with a new tv deal hes ready to cash in again and put you right back into cap problems

and still to dubas's credit, hes done a fantastic job navigating the cap to this point
Forum: Armchair-GM11 nov. 2019 à 13 h 45
Sujet: lou lamoriello
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>Point, Tkachuk, Laine, Connor, Carlo, Rantanen, McAvoy are among several highly touted RFA's that chose to wait until after the season to sign. I guess Dubas is the only GM who waited, or was it that these players wanted to wait? A lot of people like to think that Dubas isn't good because half of the people the internet want the Leafs to be bad and will bend anything into a rhetoric that supports that ideal. You sir, are buying into nonsense that is both lazy, and incorrect. Here is the reality of Dubas's work, he got all his young guys signed long term. Most other GM's can't say the same, most of the high priced RFA's signed for 2 or 3 years and all of those guys have QO's that are in the 10 million neighbourhood and some of those guys can just accept that and walk to FA. What are those contracts going to look like? Could you imagine if Matthews signed a 2 year deal with the 2nd year being over 10? He'd be able to accept his QO, get 10 or over and in a couple years be a FA and demand 15 million a season and get it. Instead the Leafs have him under contract for 5 years. Marner for 6 years, Nylander for 5 and Tavares is locked up for 6 more as well. Can Chevy in Winnipeg say that? For crying out loud, you are supporting Lou as some sort of old school hero when it comes to contract negotiations but he lost to Dubas in the Tavares contract negotiations and he currently has arguably the best RFA this summer who isn't signing until after the summer. So tell me, how would Lou have done better?</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>But Nylander lost his negotiations. Also Ferris had his guys hold out several times in the past as well. It was his MO to play games in the media, he did it with AA in Detroit, Guadreau I believe as well and Josh Anderson. But that isn't because Ferris had a history of that, it was Dubas's fault because that helps your stance. You are blaming Dubas and the Leafs for the market which is what the media tends to do because thats what sells ads, talking about the Leafs. Many young players are betting on themselves and more continue to do that, its telling that you ignored the fact that Barzal hasn't signed yet and his general manger is Lou who you are saying wouldn't have let Matthews, Marner or Nylander sign after their final ELC contract.

I am pretty sure the whole Lou wanted to sign Nylander but Shanahan wouldn't let him is 100% nonsense. Lou was given permission to sign other guys that last summer when he was GM. Why on earth would Shanahan let Lou sign Marleau but not extend Nylander? Because that is the summer you are talking about. Now you want to talk about Dubas being a bad negotiator. What about Kapanen? Or Johnsson, or Kerfoot? What about Tavares? Even Nylander? He's creeping towards being a point a game player and makes less than 7 million a season. He won all of those negotiations. All of them. Marner is too high, I'll grant you that, but Matthews? Its fine. None of these contracts are really problems. Not like Marleau was, who once again, was signed by Lou. So what are you really talking about here? Because the holes in your argument are many.</div></div>

I'm a devils fan and I love lou, bias aside though, it's well documented senior management, gm's, advisors point to toronto for screwing up the rfa market.

Theres a lot of different opinions on whether its better or worse, some being rfa's were criminally underrated and now they almost receive market value based on expectations

With all that said if you look at the other rfa deals, i'm actually okay with marner (but he shouldve been locked up at 8x8 imo when the offer was there) Nylander i think it is a good deal, but it shouldve been a better one AND the holdout was a pr nightmare. (closer to mackinnons in both term and $). My real issue with dubas (and again im a devils fan so by issue i basically mean opinion) is that the matthews contract is atrocious.

I get this is likely not popular opinion but he took toronto to the cleaners and only signed 5 years. the term is bad, the price tag is bad i just don't see how this is a win OTHER THAN if you feared he wouldnt sign at all.

Now he hits UFA at 26, you overpaid for expectation and clearly strained the dynamic for people like marner who wanted and i believe deserved to be comparably valued. McDavid took 12.5 x 8, under no circumstance should matthews get similar money for only 5 years to then walk straight to free agency

I think its great these kids got paid but imo like the guy above, I don't think negotiating is dubas's strong suit. However, he has done an excellent job navigating the cap through trades

and last thing, im not insinuating that since his contract is atrocious so is he, i think AM is great, just the contract is not for the team. i bet he loves it lol

Edit: i should add lou is great at resigning, more recently open market has not been his specialty lol
Forum: Armchair-GM6 nov. 2019 à 17 h 26
Sujet: New Jersey Devils
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Brian2016</b></div><div>Devils will just buyout Schneider after this season. No need to spend future assets considering they have the cap space and Schneider's contract is an easy buyout.</div></div>

a) hes not spending future assets
b) id rather keep schneider than neuvirth
c) not an easy buyout, we cant afford dead money with our core just coming into new contracts - if hall stays absolute best case is 8 by 10.5 imo (which is still probably low unfortunately) as of right now, schneider comes off when hughes is ready for a contract. in that same period - palmieri, coleman, bratt, blackwood, zacha, boqvist and butcher will be nearing new contracts or have new contracts and this assumes we dont resign the likes of vatanen simmonds and zajac
Forum: Armchair-GM4 nov. 2019 à 10 h 56
Sujet: How about this van
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Hedman77</b></div><div>Just as realistic</div></div>

not quite

since i have the time ill spell it out

edler is 6 years older, hes a pretty good defenseman. I'm not sure he's ever been the best on his team nevermind the nhl
Hall is one of the leagues top players, posesses a hart trophy and drives play. so right there its not even comparable.

Next is you're saying replace quinn with nico. i think quinn has a higher ceiling so yeah I wouldnt do one for one if i was van, also d have more value i think

in my offer it was hall and a first and mueller, maybe its not enough prob not based on what they see in hughes so far. maybe instead of mueller its boqvist or bratt to make it really have a chance.

you claiming my proposal is equal to nico for edler is dumb and for whatever reason i'm dumb enough to actually respond and no it is not as realistic. as my trade has a legitimate basis and could prove as a start even if too low initially. yours is a non starter
Forum: Armchair-GM24 oct. 2019 à 15 h 52
Sujet: I dont like the hall hauls ive seen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ajp_18</b></div><div>Lol. Don’t overreact when people disagree with you... makes you look dumb.

Try a 2020 1st, Foudy and a 2021 1st if Hall resigns in CBJ. That could end up being 3 1st round picks for Hall. Not a bad trade for either side.</div></div>

its not about disagreeing, the first few comments were disagreements and perfectly fine. The difference is some are dialogue and some are trolls

i created the post looking to discuss what a potential hockey trade could be, if the value is off thats fine, what changes. a team that needs offense and a team that needs defense, roster players.

While i think you're exaggerating a bit when you say they laugh at the offer, i appreciate you believe this looks more like duchene. I disagree but i see your rationale. My counter would be duchene has never been viewed as a caliber of player that hall is. in any case, still no issue there, my issue lies in people who state opinions as fact.
Forum: Armchair-GM24 oct. 2019 à 13 h 47
Sujet: I dont like the hall hauls ive seen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Lenny7</b></div><div>PK Subban, by all accounts, is a locker room cancer. Bergevin probably could have done better than a straight up swap for Weber and his brutal contract, but wanted to get him out of the room. Nashville just did the same thing.

The opposite can be said about Jones (and Werenski for that matter). Nobody has anything but good things to say about either one of those guys, which is why this doesn't even get a response apart from a light chuckle, and the phone being hung up.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>glc_0908</b></div><div>okay lol and is hall a cancer? vatanen? just a lousy, dumb take</div></div>

you know what would be a good trade for all the agm's here.

Why dont the devils sign hall to an 8 year 100 million extension, retain half of it.

Trade hughes, hall and hischier for texier and a 7th round pick. Hows that, you think he picks up the phone yet? Or should we include butcher?
Forum: Armchair-GM24 oct. 2019 à 13 h 31
Sujet: I dont like the hall hauls ive seen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Chopper02</b></div><div>If that's your expectation for a Hall haul you're going to be very very disappointed</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>palhal</b></div><div>How many GOOD top 4 Dmen do the Devils have....I don't know if Vatanen is including in that list. I look at giving up Anderson and Jones for Hall and Vatanen as even as best for Columbus.
In the meantime, you're telling Hall, we (Devils) don't want you, try to make a deal with CBJ. Can't come to contract extension and now you're welcome back with Devils.
So next year the CBJ would have Hall but lose Jones and Anderson....and Hall makes more than those two guys combined....don't know how that is better for CBJ at all.
CBJ would be 10 times better off....signing Hall in the summer or any UFAs, and trading Jones and Andersson for assets.</div></div>

first of all i expect hall to stay with nj, this isnt about expectation this is about finding better fits than the trades ive seen for pieces i dont like from calgary and edmonton. Unfortunately agm's get very defensive and mad when you propose a trade that is off. If you see above I asked how far off? a constructive response would be jones probably isnt the right fit, try werenski. Or devils need to include ty smith and possibly bratt based on value.

Contrary to popular belief gm's dont just laugh on the phone and hang up.

Say what you want hall is an mvp and an mvp caliber player, hes top 5 at driving play. from the backend is jones top 5? I think so but maybe top 10 to be sure? same goes for hall. age - sure theres merit to that convo, price, sure hall is ufa and jones isnt yet. moral of the story is vatanen and hall make columbus better than having jones and anderson. Maybe anderson is a key piece of the core to, perhaps theres another expendable forward. Maybe its just jones for hall and vatanen. If you think that the gm is hanging up the phone on that offer youre an idiot
Forum: Armchair-GM24 oct. 2019 à 13 h 2
Sujet: I dont like the hall hauls ive seen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ajp_18</b></div><div>If Columbus was to trade Jones they’d go for Marner. Who’s younger and cheaper then Hall would be. Columbus 200% says no to this trade.</div></div>

I love marner dont get me wrong, but what youre saying is a matter of preference. we could debate all day long whos better hall or marner, age or not, columbus is in their window, and its a tight window. Most would say it closed along with the free agents leaving, but i actually happen to think theyre much better than they're given credit for. Marner is great but hes not hall. Hall is a top 5 play driver, marner plays with matthews and tavares. Hes got an incredible team around him, hall did not

If you recall columbus went all in last year... the assets you have are what you have. so you either rebuild or you dont