SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

KH44

Membre depuis
1 juin 2017
Équipe favorite
Flames de Calgary
Messages dans les forums
213
Messages par jour
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GM14 juill. 2020 à 14 h 26
Sujet: Flames and Hall
Strongly disagree. Sam Bennett is a young and talented NHLer, who has demonstrated he belongs in the NHL, can fill a bottom six roll and occasionally play up the lineup. Teams have certainly payed a lot more for less. I will gladly accept that a different price may be warranted, but saying he is barely worth a 4th is incorrect.

Ottawa, and Montreal for that matter, have lots of picks, and some of those picks are going to need to be cashed in for players. A young player that can be given opportunities to demonstrate some value, but can also easily be moved around the lineup, has a lot of value. Look at Curtis Lazar, for example. Couldn't stick in the NHL, went for a second, based on pedigree and a change in scenery. Bennett has more pedigree and has performed enough to know he will be an NHLer. That has value.
Forum: Armchair-GM27 juill. 2019 à 13 h 49
Forum: Armchair-GM24 juill. 2019 à 23 h 25
Sujet: Clearing Space
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DerpNation</b></div><div>I like the train of thought. Chucky at 7.5 for 6 years seems unlikely though. Still think he gets 7.95 over 5 years</div></div>

7.5 is my accounting for his salary being 6.75 mil a year for the first three years (no one makes more than Gio!). In the following years, it spikes to 8.25 a year. Its also in Tkachuk's best interest to have the last year be worth the most money, as he would have one year before UFA, his arbitration and qualifying would be based off his last year. So a contract structure of 6.75, 6.75, 6.75, 7.25, 7.75, 9.75 would have some appeal to both sides. If he ends up at 7.95 over five, he still has two years of RFA with the Flames, something he would probably want to avoid - either a deal right to free agency, a deal one year short, or a max term deal seem more likely than a four or five year deal that lands him in another negotiation.
Forum: Armchair-GM24 juill. 2019 à 23 h 16
Sujet: Clearing Space
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CN10</b></div><div>Just wondering why you bought out Stone in this scenario as by moving Bennett, Frolik, and Brodie and only getting Zucker back now you have more than enough space to have him munch popcorn all year instead of Schlemko or even play right side on the bottom pairing if Kylington struggles on his offhand side.</div></div>

That's a fair question. Essentially, it comes down to cap space and using assets. Buying out Stone and moving those three creates 11 million in space, Zucker, Brassard and Shlemko cost 8. The 3 million in added space is to make sure if there are injuries, there is room to call guys up, it allows cap space to accumulate all year to make moves at the deadline if necessary, and clears a roster spot - sending Schlemko to the A, and bringing up a deserving player or a waiver pick up is easier than demoting a well liked veteran at this stage of his career. But not buying him out would make sense as well, it just changes the corresponding moves.
Forum: Armchair-GM2 juill. 2019 à 16 h 29
Sujet: Still Work to Be Done
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Treize131</b></div><div>Can someone explain the interest in Zucker?

I'm really not familiar with the Wild so I can only really look at his numbers and as far as term, AAV, and point production goes I don't really understand why him ending up on the Flames is almost a given (at least as far as this site is concerned).

Definitely not trolling either, I legitimately don't understand.</div></div>

He is fast and skilled, and provides some great offensive upside. Defensively he is okay, but he scores well and uses his speed. Evolving Wild (<a href="https://evolving-hockey.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://evolving-hockey.com/</a>) have him as the 30th most effective forward in the league over the past two years. He is quietly very good, by having some good strengths, and few weaknesses.