Éditer l'avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • La grandeur minimale recommandée se veut de 800px par 800px
  • Grandeur maximale: 1MB
Glisser l'image pour repositionner
Sauvegarder
Annuler

HypotheticalImpossibility

Membre depuis
10 fév 2018
Équipe favorite
Red Wings de Detroit
Messages dans les forums
167
Messages par jour
0.14
Sujets de discussion
0
Biographie
I write books in comment sections
Forum: Armchair-GM26 avr à 4 h 03
Sujet: Big Fish Hunting
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GenXHockey</b></div><div>Marc staal was traded after the flat cap was known.

San Jose retained for janmark 5th and foligno 4th and detroit a 4th for savard. what the hell are you talking about?

I was spot on right. You were wrong.</div></div>

No, you misunderstood me. When I mention the flat cap, I'm not talking about this season only.
https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-nhlpa-ratify-cba-extension-through-2025-26-season/c-317377214
https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/bettman-nhl-salary-cap-will-remain-flat-near-flat-immediate-future/
The flat cap was announced as part of the return to play plan last year. The wording stated that the cap could increase if hockey-related revenue was high enough. This left many (myself included) hopeful that the cap could increase for next season. Last month, Bettman stated that the cap will likely stay flat for the "immediate future," pretty much guaranteeing that the cap won't rise next season. That's what I was talking about.
The trade above has Detroit retaining $2M for a 4th. San Jose retained $1.375M for a 4th, $562.5K for a 5th, and Detroit retained $1.0625M for a 4th. Considering what actually happened at the deadline, the proposed trade is bad value.
Forum: Armchair-GM28 mar à 9 h 12
Sujet: Out of the box thinking
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Hockey_Nerd</b></div><div>Yes you can. Rules #1 and #5 will explain that for you:

What is a retained salary transaction/trade
When a team trades a player, they have the option to retain a part of their salary (and cap hit). The team who retains the salary then pays the retained percentage of the salary, and also retains the percentage of the cap hit until the contract expires. The following requirements must be met to retain salary:
<strong>1. The percentage retained cannot exceed 50 percent of the player’s salary (including all bonuses) and Salary Cap Hit.</strong>
2. The same percentage must be retained for both the player’s salary and Salary Cap Hit, and cannot be modified.
3. All teams are limited to a maximum of 3 retained salary contracts per season.
4. Teams cannot retain an aggregate amount of more than 15 percent of the Salary Cap Upper Limit.
<strong>5. Players’ contracts are limited to 2 retained salary transactions per contract.</strong>

The max allowed per team is 50% of the players contract, and that players contract can be retained twice on. So really Vancouver trades Benn to Detroit and Vancouver retains 50% of Benn's original contract (50% of $2M = $1M). Then Detroit trades Benn to Toronto and retains 50% of the contract of Benn that they acquired (50% of $1M = $500K). It's allowed and has been done before.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>Yes and an example is Robin Lehner last TDL. BOTH CHI and TOR retained on his contract.</div></div>

My bad, I had interpreted the rules as two trades that can equal up to 50%, but you're right, the Lehner trade exceeded that.
Forum: Armchair-GM13 mar à 20 h 08
Sujet: Staal
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>grodziQ</b></div><div>who are you to judge my hockey knowledge? XD ur team is in the bottom of the standings ur irrelevant.

Gardiner is better than every LHD on your trash team and even if you don't take him he's still better. if you think Canes will pay in Staal for Gardiner u must be deluded fan. also, Scotty Bowman's times are over so wake up bruh</div></div>

Team standings does not correlate to fan hockey knowledge, dude. It's entirely irrelevant how good you think Gardiner is. His $4M per year contract is not good for what he brings. The only reason the Wings would consider taking him would be to meet expansion draft requirements.
And Staal for Gardiner is bad from the Wings perspective. For some reason, there are rumors that Staal will be dealt for a late pick. Gardiner has negative value because of his contract. Gardiner might be the better player here, but his contract is much worse because of the extra year. Carolina doesn't need Gardiner, and would benefit more from dumping Gardiner's final year than Detroit would from picking him up.
Forum: Armchair-GM17 jan à 19 h 43
Sujet: Sandpaper
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>aedoran</b></div><div>Before last season your valuation of Bertuzzi because of Larkin and Mantha would totally make sense. After last season it doesn't make as much sense because Mantha was injured for a good part of the season and AA forgot how to play hockey. Leaving Larkin and Bertuzzi as the only players that could score with any consistency and they were split up to try to get other players scoring. Bertuzzi playing with Neilson and Filppula as his centers most of the season I think he proved he can produce on his own. But as you said it just opinion. I do like Liljegren but as you stated that side of the D is the only position Detroit doesn't have to worry about.</div></div>

I didn't mean that Bert is only valuable because he plays with Larkin and Mantha, I meant that his value would be inflated because he has such good chemistry with them. Probably could have worded it a bit better, to be fair. I also think Bert's a better player than Kerfoot overall, and trading the two would be a downgrade for the Wings.
Forum: Armchair-GM 8 jan à 11 h 23
Sujet: Sandpaper
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ryminister_27</b></div><div>Bertuzzi played with Larkin and Mantha.. Kerfoot played with multiple wingers. Mikheyev, Johnsson, Kapanen, Engvall, etc. None of them come close to the calibre of line mates Bertuzzi had. Kerfoot's also a centre. They're more valuable than dime a dozen wingers. Kerfoot's versatile. Plus I said Bertuzzi's contract expires next season and Kerfoot's doesn't. That would cost the Leafs more on his contract, not to mention he's likely be exposed to Seattle and lost for nothing. Makes no sense for the Leafs. Again, I said MARGINAL upgrade to Bertuzzi. But the difference in the players is FAR less than Liljegren. Ok buddy?</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>aedoran</b></div><div>And you think Bertuzzi had it any easier? Last season AA pretty much forgot how to play and Mantha was on IR for quite awhile, So they split up Bertuzzi and Larkin. The some of the players Bertuzzi was paired shouldn't even be in the NHL anymore.

Kapanen's career numbers 41g + 49a for 90 points in 202 games

Bertuzzi's career numbers 49g + 79a for 119 points in 199 games

So does that mean Kapanen only marginally better than Kerfoot?</div></div>

Kerfoot and Bertuzzi play a completely different style of game. Comparing their stats is literally comparing apples to oranges.
Bert is more valuable to the Wings because he fits in so well with Larkin and Mantha. Regardless of if Kerfoot was the better player (I don't think he is, but hey, everybody has their opinions), his value would be inflated to the Wings for that reason. Also worth considering, the Wings have Hronek, Seider, Lindstrom, and potentially Tuomisto at RD. Liljegren isn't a bad prospect by any stretch of the imagination, but his value to the Wings isn't all that high because of the prospects they already have at that position.

In short, Detroit would decline. What they have is more appealing to them than what's offered.