SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

L_B_R

Membre depuis
12 janv. 2016
Équipe favorite
Blackhawks de Chicago
Messages dans les forums
515
Messages par jour
0.2
Forum: Armchair-GM9 avr. 2021 à 22 h 39
Forum: Armchair-GM8 avr. 2021 à 19 h 50
Sujet: Hmmm
Forum: Armchair-GM3 avr. 2021 à 15 h 20
Forum: Armchair-GM17 mars 2021 à 18 h 4
Sujet: TML_Hall
Forum: Armchair-GM17 mars 2021 à 17 h 57
Forum: Armchair-GM17 mars 2021 à 17 h 50
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jco5ta5</b></div><div>From Chicago standpoint, I’m listening to this offer. $6M for Skinner who can easily put up 20 goals and has put up 30 before. Put him on a line with Kane or Dach or (God willing) Toews. Give him PP1 minutes he could do well in Chicago.

You mention it takes a 1st then some. Ryan Johnson was a 1st rounder in 2019. He’s a LD which Hawks could use more of since De Haan and Zadorov may not be in the future plans. Plus the two draft picks will be in the 30s and 60s. This is a quality return IMO. Hawks could also always try to flip Skinner at a deadline in the future and retain 50% and you know teams will jump at Skinner for $3M. If that happens hawks are left with nothing but tons of assets (3 from this trade and a 1-2 from the subsequent Skinner trade if it happens).</div></div>

They probably want a 1st that is above 15, not a former late round pick which has closer value to a 3rd than a top 15 historically.

Also Johnson is a decent prospect but 1) he's years away which means he's not taking over De Haan / Zadorov when they'd actually need him to and 2) the Hawks have plenty of guys like him in the system, even LDs. Like he's a slightly bigger version of Beaudin or slightly smaller Kalynuk or Carlsson, who are already NHL ready. Or they also do have plenty of LD prospects like Demin, Kaiser, Krutil, Phillips, etc that weren't taken as high up but it's not an area of weakness. The Hawks need forward prospects, not defenders.

The picks are fine if you were talking about a few years of $6m in salary or retaining $3m, but there are <em><strong>6 years</strong></em> left of that. Chicago wouldn't even give Debrincat or Kubalik $6m for 6 years when they were signing them, no way they're taking on that long a contract right now. And def not going to want to carry dead $3m in space of that long either so that whole "they could flip him and retain" doesn't make sense in a flat cap world.
Forum: Armchair-GM9 oct. 2020 à 1 h 21
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Different_Perspective_85</b></div><div>That may be what he's worth, but that's not the same as what you'll get. Teams don't line up and pay premium asset's to solve other teams cap issues for them. Maybe that's what they get for him but I'd be surprised. I'd be pissed if my teams gave that up for him. Good player, great dude, agree with your description of him. COVID economy, flat cap and that contract sucks. Just don't see it. I could see OTT MAYBE doing this. To bring in an effective pro and help them hit the cap floor. Even then... replace the first with a solid prospect.</div></div>
The Hawks aren't really in such a cap crunch that they need a team to do them favors anymore after the Maatta trade and non resigning Crawford. They have $11m in cap space with only Kubalik and Strome of significance to sign who will reported be around $6.5m combined so then they'll end up with between $2.5-3m in space after they bring up 2-3 more entry level players (Mitchell, Suter, etc). Smith might be on LTIR this season since his back is so messed up which frees up even more space if they want. But $2.5m+ space means they don't need to move anyone else unless they really want to do it.

So yeah, def no need to move Saad anymore unless they're actually getting some assets for him. Otherwise, they'll just wait until the TDL where he should get normal rental price of a 1st + prospect OR a pick + good young player depending on how much they're willing to retain.
Forum: Armchair-GM9 oct. 2020 à 1 h 6
Forum: Armchair-GM9 oct. 2020 à 0 h 7
Forum: Armchair-GM3 oct. 2020 à 15 h 44
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DDossett</b></div><div>Ok, solid point. but that was 5 years ago. I feel like the RFAs are getting a lot more with term now, do you think he would get 3.5 from arbitration? I mean its not the most amazing ppg ever but it still great, he's still a calder finalist and he looked good doing it. I feel like i'd offer sheet him for 4350000 x 3 easy. If i was looking for a left winger.</div></div>
Those are getting more with term are those that have over 140 games and maintained at least a .6 PPG during their ELC with a bump on the final year. So Debrincat, essentially.

Stone was 5 years ago but there aren't that many high end guys that play so little in their ELC year(s) so it's just overall really hard to find comps for Kubalik. I went back looking for comps with low games played with at least a .6 PPG (for reference, Kubalik was at .68 PPG):

Kris Versteeg (23) got a $3.08m x 3y deal in 2009 after 91 games and coming off a .68 PPG season with 22 goals + a calder trophy nom.
Michael Grabner (24) got $3m x 5y deal in 2011 after 96 games and coming off a .68 PPG season with 34 goals + a calder trophy nom.
Logan Couture (22) got a $2.875m x 2y deal in 2011 after 104 games and coming off a .71 PPG season with 32 goals + a calder trophy nom.
Ondrej Palat (23) got a $3.33m x 3y deal in 2014 after 95 games and coming off a .72 PPG season with 23 goals + a calder trophy nom.
Tyler Johnson (24) got a $3.33m x 3y deal in 2014 after 96 games and coming off a .62 PPG season with 24 goals + a calder trophy nom.
Mark Stone (23) got a $3.5m x 3y deal in 2015 after 103 games and a .8 PPG season with 26 goals + a calder trophy nom.
Connor Sheary (25) got a $3m x 3y deal in 2017 after 105 games and a .86 PPG season with 23 goals.

The closest in timing is Sheary who was is in a similar position to Kubalik but actually had a higher PPG - just less goals. But there were a lot of examples of guys who got calder trophy noms in this group and they still all got paid under $4m.

On top of all this, Kubalik may not score as well next season - his sh% was at nearly 20% and as high as 32% after he got moved to the top 6 which isn't sustainable. If he can increase his shots, then that'll offset the regression in sh% that is highly likely coming but it's all things to consider when discussing a player with a relatively small sample size. 100 games is typically the minimum basis for assessment for a reason. And outside of the 1 games in the playoffs, Kubalik only had 3 points which doesn't instill confidence in consistency.

So after all that, if the Hawks do sign him for $4.3m then it won't be the end of the world and Kubalik is likely worth that but it would be nice if Bowman could for once take advantage like many many many other teams to get a RFA signed to a lower bridge deal. If Tampa can get Kucherov to take his bridge deal, Idk why Bowman can't manage Kubalik (and Strome).
Forum: Armchair-GM26 sept. 2020 à 19 h 55
Forum: Armchair-GM19 sept. 2020 à 15 h 5
Forum: Armchair-GM19 août 2020 à 22 h 31
Forum: Armchair-GM19 août 2020 à 22 h 27
Forum: Armchair-GM8 juill. 2020 à 23 h 51
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Halla</b></div><div>strome isnt taking 3.5 thats just silly. He can point to Kerfoot (3.5x3) coming off 43 and 42pt seasons and say he wants significantly more based on 57pts last year and a 50+pt pace this year.

4.5-5 per

Kubalik as well. why would he take 3.25 coming off a 30g in 68 game season? The only reasonable deal here is crawford if he gives a hometown discount. Hawks need to clear 3-4 at min</div></div>

Tbf Strome doesn't have arbitration rights, so comparisons to other players isn't going to be as strict - the Hawks have all the power unless Strome wants to sit the season out. Bowman just needs to hold out if need be, like the Lightning have done for a few guys now. I mean, if Kucherov will take a $4.7x3 year deal after a two 65+ seasons, then the Hawks can press Strome into taking a lower bridge deal, esp since he's only got a about a season and ahlf worth of games played at higher production.

Kubalik is arbitration eligible but his lack of games played is going to hurt his argument. Great production but it's not been proven it's consistent.

Idk about exact amounts (maybe closer to 4 each) or years but a short bridge seems beneficial to for both team and players imo - ride out the flat cap years, keep producing with the team they know works, and then max out their next contract when there's going to be more money available. Players who unfortunately had to sign long term close to the lockout did get jipped on some money.

It'll be interesting to see what happens! I generally like Bowman as a GM but he hasn't been great when it comes to signing guys to second deals.
Forum: Armchair-GM16 juin 2019 à 14 h 26
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>capsin9</b></div><div>Bura (24) 12g 13a 25 points 76 games (.33ppg)
Perlini(23). 14 g 7a 21 points 68 games (.31ppg)
Cagg (24) 12g 11a 23 points 55 games (.42ppg)
Boyd(25) 5g 15a 20 points 54 games (.37ppg) 4th minutes

I mean they all seem to be similar players. Bura actually was more productive and caggs is slightly more productive than boyd. (Played top line minutes)

bura is going to be more $$ but hawks can’t possibly use him worse than the caps. They had him playing 4th line minutes</div></div>
Perlini was .33 PPG on the Hawks and nearly .7 PPG when he was finally given a 3rd line 6 role instead of on the 4th. Maybe Burka could too but the price difference for the Hawks won't work - they'll want a younger player at half the cost if all else is even.

As for Caggiula, he had a .46 PPG with the Hawks and honestly it was hard to find players who worked well with Toews last season consistently, so I'm just not sure they'd be willing to mess with that. It wasn't really about the points, but about how he was able to do a lot of dirty work down low and in front of the net soToews did not have to do it. Caggiula has now proven to compliment high end players on two teams, even if he himself isn't producing a ton of points, whereas Boyd hasn't. So Idk why the Hawks would give up the proven to work with their guys and younger Caggiula. It doesn't make sense from their perspective.

Like I totally get why you'd think they'd be good swaps on paper but when you get down to the Hawks not wanting to pay more for slightly older players that they don't know will even work as well, it's not going to work.