SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Danny12357

Membre depuis
12 juill. 2018
Équipe favorite
Maple Leafs de Toronto
Deuxième équipe favorite
Capitals de Washington
Messages dans les forums
349
Messages par jour
0.2
Forum: NHL Trades2 févr. 2023 à 12 h 38
Forum: NHL Trades2 févr. 2023 à 12 h 36
Forum: NHL Trades2 févr. 2023 à 9 h 34
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KSIxSKULLS</b></div><div>You're in the camp of wait and see so you can take hindsight into the equation when the GMs couldn't. Vancouver won the trade based on the circumstances when the trade happened.</div></div>

I agree completely, the only real caveat to the "wait to see what happens" is when the GM demonstrates later they had knowledge that most people didn't. Trades need to be evaluated based on the information that was available at the time, but sometimes we can find out later that the GMs involved had information that can change our perception of the deal.

I think with Vancouver, they win the deal against the Islanders, but whether or not they got "good" value will kind of depend on how the assets will be used in a rebuild. If Rutherford fully understands this is a tear down, then priortizing the 1st as an asset above all else is the right move, and a more valuable 1st wasn't likely to be available. If he plans on a 1-2 year turn around, then the deal is a bit underwhelming because the roster player he got back is negative value, and the prospect doesn't have a super high ceiling.

The Islanders virtually can't change my mind. There is no scenario where I can look at this trade and make sense of it. I have heard some saying Lou will just flip Horvat for more than he paid to get him if things don't work out, and while I don't doubt the packages out there will get better closer to the deadline, the thing is that that also means the value of the pick they just gave away will also have gone up, because it will be more of a sure thing to either be in the middle of a deep draft or an unprotected pick for an aging team with an empty prospect cupboard who just missed the playoffs twice in a row. If it doesn't work and they flip Horvat, they enter an offseason where they should clearly start a rebuild without their own first the next year. That's still terrible.
Forum: NHL Trades1 févr. 2023 à 15 h 29
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>jr400</b></div><div>I don't think they were planning to flip Beauvillier, but I didn't consider that he might be a cap dump, other than to the extent that the Islanders needed to clear some space for Horvat’s cap hit this season. I must admit that I haven’t seen Beauvillier play much lately, but I saw him as a solid middle-6 guy at a salary that was by no means a bargain but not unreasonably high for what he brings. I think that’s how the Canucks see him too, though I can’t say for certain, because I wouldn’t expect them to admit that they didn’t really want a guy they just traded for. He’s only got one more year left on his contract, so he won’t be a long-term liability, but they’re not in a position to trade cap space for futures. Horvat’s value to Vancouver was limited to whatever they could get in a trade for him, but as one of this year’s most sought after rentals and with the ability to retain more salary than they did, they should have been able to get a good return without taking back a contract they didn’t want. If Beau (not Bo) is a negative asset, they would have been better off to leave him out of the deal and take fewer positive assets.</div></div>

Beauvillier is probably overall pretty neutral to slightly negative. He's basically getting paid twice what he should be, and it's apparent teams aren't willing to pay players of his calibre and age the money he is getting. Dylan Strome and Nino Neideritter both signed last summer for less money and limited term, and both have been significantly better players over the last few seasons than Beauvillier, so it's unlikely he is seen as an asset based on his cap hit. Vancouver can afford to just take him back, and can maybe flip him in his UFA season for an asset if they put him in a position that best utilizes his skills, but I don't think he was a requested trade piece so much as the player that made sense to make the money work.
Forum: NHL Trades1 févr. 2023 à 15 h 19
Vancouver clearly wins this deal, but I don't think either fan base can be too thrilled.

The Islanders make perhaps the worst trade I have seen in years. This deal is tough to swallow for a contender, but for a team where Horvat's addition doesn't even bring them close to even money to make the playoffs, it's just ridiculous. Signing Horvat to an extension is actually likely to make this worse, as Horvat represents the exact type of scenario to create a massive overpayment on an extension. He's going to be 28 at the beginning of a new deal, he is a former captain, he is perceived to be a good 2 way player despite very mediocre defensive metrics and results, he's having a career year, and he is riding high on percentages that aren't likely to be sustainable. He's a good player, but given that he didn't come with an immediate extension, it kind of suggests that he isn't a guarantee to sign, or at the very least it's going to mean paying top dollar, and that isn't something a team in the Islanders situation should be interested in. The fact of the matter is that the Islanders are likely either giving up a mid first in a historically deep draft, or going into 2024 with the NHLs oldest roster after missing the playoffs two years in a row while having no 1st round pick. That is awful asset management. Basically this amounts to Lou just taking a stab and hoping for a miracle, but probably having it blow up in his face.

From Vancouver's point of view, I think they made the right call in trading Horvat given their situation, but the return isn't spectacular, and there is some concern that it signals a quick retool when this roster needs a complete overhaul. Beavillier is negative value right now, he's basically a Pierre Engvall getting paid to be Adrian Kempe. Raty is a good prospect, but represents a safe bet with modest ceiling, so overall the return is a little underwhelming, and could point to signs that Rutherford might try and rush things and turn his tenure in Vancouver into more mediocrity.

Overall Vancouver easily wins the deal, but fans will probably want to see a bit more of the bigger picture before they get too excited, but at least there is a lot of hope on their side of things. The Islanders just reek of desperation, and end up making a deal that might go down as the worst we have seen since Hall for Larsson. Some will try and defend it, but it's not defensible. The reality is that if Lou was going to take a swing this big, it should have been in the years where the Islanders were atop their division with a deep playoff ready roster, letting those teams sink or swim on their own, and then spending this much on a team that has been very mediocre for the last 18 months is just a terrible strategy, no matter how optimistic you are.
Forum: NHL Signings21 sept. 2022 à 15 h 30
Forum: NHL Signings21 sept. 2022 à 15 h 14
Forum: NHL Signings21 sept. 2022 à 15 h 4
Forum: NHL Signings9 sept. 2022 à 6 h 53
Forum: NHL Signings7 sept. 2022 à 13 h 12
Forum: NHL Signings4 août 2022 à 13 h 51
Forum: NHL Signings2 août 2022 à 12 h 32
Normally I just answer these based on whether or not I think the player will deliver more in value to the team than the cap hit costs them. I would say that is a fair for any deal where the player is very likely to be worth more than they are being paid. There is very little argument to where it can be a bad idea to sign a player who is willing to accept less than they are worth, so that works pretty cleanly in those cases. However I do think in cases where it's borderline or possibly unlikely the player is worth the value, I think it's fair to consider the context and overall strategy of the team, and this is one of those cases.

I think it's actually pretty likely John Klingberg isn't a top pairing D anymore, so there is a good chance he doesn't deliver $7M in value to Anaheim next year, since you expect top pairing quality for $7M. However Anaheim wants to make a bit of a push toward playoff contention, and wants to insulate their young stars. If Klingberg helps this team get to the playoffs, then regardless of whether or not he was worth $7M, it's worthwhile since Anaheim had nothing better to do with that cap space for just 1 year. If they don't, and they flip him at the deadline for any asset what so ever, they basically just bought a pick or prospect for nothing but cash, while getting a veteran presence to help mentor some of their younger players for part of the season. The risk is virtually 0, and the rewards, while likely modest, are still worth the gamble, and they literally had nothing else they could really do with that cap space for just a year. They probably couldn't commit to using the space to take on multi-year cap dumps, so I think this is a good bet.

Even when this type of gamble doesn't work, similar to Hall in Buffalo, it still kind of worked because Buffalo managed to get a Hall for part of a year and a 2nd, which is still better than just sitting on the cap space.

So it's an easy win for a team still working its way out of a rebuild, and the player gets paid well and a chance to prove he is worthy of a longer commitment. I am honestly not sure why we don't see more of this in the NHL.
Forum: NHL Signings27 juill. 2022 à 9 h 42
Forum: NHL Signings19 juill. 2022 à 7 h 38
Forum: NHL Signings19 juill. 2022 à 7 h 31