SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

GMBL

Membre depuis
23 mai 2022
Messages dans les forums
8702
Messages par jour
12.1
Forum: Armchair-GMHier à 21 h 59
Sujet: A Tame Leafs Off-Season
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Boltsradynasty</b></div><div>You crazy if you think Robertson gets you Kaliyev and a 3rd Snoop says he wants his stash back.</div></div>

Not really, unless someone wants to trade a 2nd or a change of scenery candidate (like Robertson) for him straight up. Blake called him out publicly even though he hasn't had much opportunity to play. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't get tendered a qualifying offer.

The two have similar production at the NHL level career-wise except that Robertson's production has gone up, while Kaliyev's has gone down. Kaliyev does have a large sample size of being as (or more) effective as Robertson. So, if LA has interest in Robertson then Kaliyev + a 3rd isn't farfetched if they don't, then Kaliyev + a 4th or 1 for 1.
Forum: Armchair-GMHier à 20 h 13
Sujet: Montour Domi and cheap
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>draft_em_sign_em_trade_em</b></div><div>Matthews wasn't close to be healthy in game 4 (left the game early).
Reaves was on the ice on a couple very key goals against.
What did JT do when all that drama was going down on live TV on the Leafs bench.</div></div>

It's not a big deal that things got heated on the bench between the star players (Marner throwing a tantrum after is another thing). People want them to show more emotion in their exit interviews when it doesn't matter.

JT is captain material, he didn't end up captaining two teams by accident. That being said I don't think that he's the best captain for the Leafs for a couple of reasons: 1) Matthews and Marner seemed to have always looked up more to guys like Marleau and Thornton more than they do Tavares and 2) it seems that the Leafs played harder for Rielly when he was injured during the regular season last year and for Matthews this post-season then they did for Tavares when he was injured during the MTL series. I'm sure he's still respected by all in the locker room but I think the role of alternate captain would suite him better. I don't think Matthews is a better leader than Tavares but I think it's time to charge him with that role and hope that he can step it up. Giving the C to Rielly or anyone else will probably just lead to division in the locker room.
Forum: Armchair-GMmer. à 12 h 10
Sujet: Waiting for Tavares to Leave
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LuckyMoneyPuck</b></div><div>I don't think MP is a top pairing guy, I think he's a really good 2LD. However not every team has a legit 1LD..... much like PIT.
But that doesn't mean he won't get 7 years. It makes too much sense for everyone involved. It's not like anyone is looking at him like he can't fill that contract.
You figure he's good till at least 34. the 2 extra years is whatever. Everyone pays a price on the backend in FA.
He's probably more likely to be LTIR those last couple years anyway. It's not like he's got some great history of staying healthy.
But he gets enough ice time that baring an injury next year, people will give those years up.
There is always need in defense. Just look at teams 3rd pairings around the league. PIT is a great example, it's really bad because there isn't enough depth in Defesnemen around the league.
So when you are talking about 2nd pairing guys who are really good, you can expect them to get that term.
Hell if Mayfield can get 7 years, I'm pretty sure MP is going to get it too.</div></div>

Yeah, I'm definitely not saying he won't get but just saying depending on the options, if he tests free agency he might get less. His best chance at getting it though would be as an extension in Pittsburgh or elsewhere if he gets traded, might even get the 8-years as you suggested. In FA, because of the competition teams usually need to offer higher $/year, so they will try to limit the term if possible. If he has a great year and is among the top 2 (maybe 3) best defenders that should increase his chances. Also, if he's more term leads to a significantly a lower AAV, then that could be a factor in helping him getting 7 years from a cap-strapped team.
Forum: Armchair-GMmer. à 6 h 35
Sujet: Waiting for Tavares to Leave
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LuckyMoneyPuck</b></div><div>you somehow think the penguins can't resign him for 8... that's pretty foolish assumption.</div></div>

I didn't assume anything about him signing in Pittsburgh or not. I said "<strong>if</strong> he's signing as a UFA" which is what would be relevant to this ACGM, he can only sign for 7. The Leafs could acquire him before FA and sign him to 8 years but again I made a qualified statement which was true.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LuckyMoneyPuck</b></div><div>It doesn't matter how many guys are out there it doesn't really change the value on the player. They are still going to get a 7-8 year deal.
It's like saying because Guentzel is out there Reinhart isn't getting 7-8 years. That's bs and we both know it. It's silly you even think that's a relevant point.
Sure the money matters, But 6.5 in TOR isn't a lot. He would make more at 6.5 playing in PIT so that's not some winning point for you.
TOR isn't FL if anything you have to over pay guys for the money to be the same due to taxes.
That kind of argument only works for teams like FL, SEA, VGK, DAL.
The length of the deal is just as important as the $. At the end of they deal, they probably aren't going to get another big money deal. So adding on an extra 8th year matters. It's why home team gets that advantage. To help them keep their players. It's absurd to think the length doesn't matter.</div></div>

I'm not saying length doesn't ever matter, "I said <strong>merely</strong> just getting max term isn't as important as the final contract value" since your objection is solely based on the contract term. When I said that destination matters as well, I wasn't talking about taxes, I was talking about all the reasons for a player to select one place over the next and potentially leave money on the table. Finally, Petterssen isn't a TWD, he's a DFD, so it does matter who else is available because DFD don't usually get that much term in UFA, comparing his situation to 1st line FWDs who never fail to get max term makes no sense. <strong> Maybe you view MP as a true top 2 DFD like Slavin which is why you think he'll certainly get 7 years </strong> but I'm going to have to agree to disagree if that's the case. If you're considering him to be a top 4 D like I am, then maybe consider when was the last time a top-4 DFD got signed for max term in free agency that took them beyond age 34. Graves (27), Savard (30), Tanev (30), Brodie (30), and Myers (29) all signed deals that took them up until they were 34. Out of all those guys the most relavant would be Tanev and Brodie who were among the best DFD in the league at the time.<strong> Again, I'm not saying he won't get 7 years but it's not going to be a surprise if he only gets 6 or 5 if he ends up a free agent.</strong>


These are the UFA defenders who got 7+-year deals in free agency during the cap era:

2008: Brian Campbell (29) 8 years
2009: Mattias Ohlund (32) 7 years
2011: Christian Erhoff (28) 10 years
2012: Ryan Suter (27) 13 years

2014: Matt Niskanen (27) 7 years
2020: Torey Krug (29) 7-years, Alex Pietrangelo (30) 7 years
2021: Dougie Hamilton (28) 7 years
2022: Scott Mayfield (30) 7 years*

*Mayfield isn't considered an extension but that's what it essential was.
Forum: Armchair-GMmer. à 0 h 27
Sujet: Seravalli Insights
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>fangm</b></div><div>Haven't heard anyone else mention it but you could be right about a 3rd team. He makes league min this year after his signing bonus is paid so if the deal happens after July 1st then you could get someone like Chicago to retain $5.5M for a 3rd (only ~$387,500k in real money) and suddenly even if its a one year rental that is really attractive. Could also be really attractive to someone like Minnesota who have $14M in read cap next year but then just $1.6M after that so they can get him cheap next year then afford his full salary afterwards. Likely a few others teams in a similar position with a veteran or bad contract expiring who can only take $2.5M or $5.5M next year but can afford the full $11.5-$12M the year after.</div></div>

I was actually saying I'm against the idea. For a 3rd team to be involved would just waterdown the already reduced return. Better off getting a serviceable player (which could be a vet) in addition to a valuable roster player, don't want to take on a bad expiring contract either. The goal is to have a chance to win after all.
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 23 h 37
Sujet: Seravalli Insights
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>FoxYou727</b></div><div>🎯

Although I suspect they will have to take back salary which isn't a bad thing all things considered, they'll probs get a 1st and a 3-6 million dollar middle/top 6 foward or top 4 d-man with some term

Than again with his NMC, Marner can really hand tie the leafs like Senko and Giroux did</div></div>

Yeah, a lot of people are underrating the benefit of the Leafs taking back salary in a Marner trade, and suggesting a 3rd team or the Leafs retain on him. I could see them land both a middle/top 6 F and a top 4 D-man and a 1st (2025 or later-moving up the draft is a waste of Marner's value) with one of the players being on an expiring deal/pending RFA and the other with term and possibly another pick or prospect. In the case of UTAH, they have a ton of cap space and a lot of pending RFAs, so it could be something like Hayton+Durzi+2025 1st+a prospect and then UTAH might go out and acquire Montour's signing rights or maybe they deal someone else instead of Durzi.

That being said all signs point to Marner holding the Leafs hostage. The best course of action is to try to sign him for ~11.5M, but if he doesn't want to leave anything on the table then see if he's willing to waive. I think the Leafs best bet is to try trading him to Vegas for Theodore + Karlsson + maybe some futures.
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 23 h 3
Sujet: Binnington
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jded</b></div><div>There’s hasn’t been an ounce of actual intel related to a Zegras trade since Lebrun made it very clear based on multiple sources that the Ducks never brought Zegras’ name up in a single trade discussion months ago. Zegras is also a LW, and in the top 6 ANA has Gauthier (who’s played a whopping 1 NHL game), and Zegras. He’s one of the only proven scorers on what was one of the worst offenses in the NHL. Do they need another top 6? Yes, at RW. But if you move Zegras for it you just swapped the need from RW to LW, it makes no sense

Friedman can say what he’d like, it’s his job to say things that get views, so I’m not surprised. But Zegras brings something ANA needs badly to a position they lack depth at, and their own team, coaches, and management have done nothing but praise him all year, including the end of year interviews</div></div>

Again, I'm well aware EF was speculating which is why I said if there is truth to it. That being said Verbeek said he didn't shop/isn't actively shopping Zegras but he didn't say he was an untouchable either from what I know so that does say something. Again, I'm not saying they should trade him for Marner, just wondering if they will trade him in general. As for adding another top 6 F, they might manage to do so via FA.
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 19 h 40