Good Opinion Haver
Membre depuis
7 juin 2018
Équipe favorite
Blues de St-Louis
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 14 h 9
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 14 h 6
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>Hagel can return that because were guaranteed 4 years dirt cheap even if they qualify him, and will end up getting 11 at a 5.1 mill AAV. Hagel, even if you view him as just a 6 million dollar player (I view him around 7.5), generates 13.5 million dollars over that 3 years+ the RFA control
Meier as a 10 million dollar player generates 19.1 million dollars in excess value over the term
Buch even if you view him as a 10 million dollar player (which I don't) generates just 14.2 mill in excess value in 2 years of control 50% retained.</div></div>

This is a gross mischaracterization of how the cap work. You can't average out his cap hit between two different contracts. And again, they're in it to win now

Also I think that Meier would be a 10 million dollar player had he been 26 year old UFA in a 90 million cap environment, and I think Buchnevich would be a slightly-less-but-probably-not-as-much-as-you-think player if he was 26 and hitting UFA in a 90 million cap environment (instead of 30 like he's going to be). There's a good chance his next contract is 8million regardless.

Obviously no one is paying a 30 year old 10 million bucks. The ages are different, so the contracts that they're going to get are not going to be comparable.

But again the years of below market cost certainty are what you're paying for. Meier had zero years of below market cost certainty for the Devils to take advantage of. Buchnevich, hypothetically, will have one. Hagel had two. I see the price for Buchnevich as being somewhere in between Meier and Hagel (a late1st, and a B+/A- prospect plus a bunch of stuff that's not really important depending on how you feel about Zetterlund, and 2 late 1sts plus 2 B prospects) because his upside contains elements of both trades.
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 13 h 53
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 13 h 43
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 13 h 39
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 13 h 30
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>Hagel cost 1.5 and had RFA control, upside, and then they got him on an 8 year deal because of that RFA control.

You're simply underestimating how much RFA control is worth in today's NHL.</div></div>

I completely disagree, I think you're overestimating it. We've seen multiple players- including Meier himself- use the nuances of their RFA status to push their preferred destination. Debrincat, Tkachuk, Dubois as well. The Sharks had the same control, but they hemmed and hawed about possibly re-signing him all season until Meier finally said he wouldn't sign. Being an RFA doesn't magically mean you're absolutely going to stay just like being a UFA doesn't magically mean you're absolutely going to leave.

Tampa didn't trade for Hagel because they were excited to get him on a 8 year deal. They traded for Hagel because they wanted a middle six player with top six potential making 1.5 million for multiple playoff runs. That is what is being offered in a Buchnevich trade as well- multiple playoff runs with a player on a significant discount. Also they extended him a year early, so his RFA status didn't even factor in.

Buchnevich is older and he isn't signed for as long, but he's also a better player than Hagel was then. There will be risk associated with extending him at age 30 but the contending team will be the first one to have an opportunity make an offer to him, just like Hagel. Until then they can get a PPG player that can be used in all situations for less than 3 million, and for teams in win now mode that's all that really matters here.
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 9 h 51
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>Oh are we pretending it's 2+ years ago? And that every awful trade sets the market forever? How on Earth is what the Blues paid for him even infinitesimally relevant here?

Buch is easily morr valuable than Toffoli right now. Also irrelevant.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>I don't know what to tell you.
We saw what Buchnevich RFA rights went for. We saw the contract he got. His production 5v5 is virtually identical to what it was before then
The UFA market, especially on wingers has a peak, and it isn't all that high.

Meier had a large bidding war because his skillset is valued leaguewide. He got a contract that reflects that.

Just look at what Toffoli went for both times.</div></div>

Yeah the disconnect here really seems to be that one person believes previous trade values are unimpeachable. Buchnevich RFA trades and Meier trades were both not particularly good for the team giving them away, but there were extraneous circumstances that contributed to that in both cases (I outlined why I think the Sharks didn't do very well in the Meier trade in my previous comment. Buchnevich obviously I think the GM didn't do a good enough job to drive up prices but in Drury's defense his team was capped out and Buchnevich was due an unknown muli-million dollar contract with a short resume coming off a year with no fans in the building where most teams were unwilling to spend real dollars).

These previous trade values can only be taken if the context is the same, and I think the circumstances of a hypothetical Buchnevich trade are much different than when he got traded the first time and when Meier was traded to the Devils.

Also this whole "his production at 5v5 is the basically the same" thing, like I get what you're saying but that's not how player values work, even stripping the financial context I just mentioned of that trade. Being a consistent 5v5 player for 5 years is more valuable than being one for 2 years, obviously. Also a player being good on the power play is worth something, GMs aren't just going to pretend that doesn't exist just because it didn't when he was in New York. He got an opportunity in St. Louis and ran with it. He's been a consistent, top line presence in all situations in St. Louis and you could get him for 3 million this year and next year. That should be worth a lot.
Forum: Armchair-GMmar. à 9 h 28
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>I disagree on that.

Meier&gt;Buch quite clearly imo.

meier was a rental + 8 years extension
buch is a rental +rental

Meier at 8x8.8 likely has more value around the league than 1 year of Buch at 2.9</div></div>

Not arguing that Buchnevich is better than Meier, and I said as much in my original comment.

The Devils didn't trade for Meier with an extension though, so you can't act like that factored super heavily into the trade return. The Devils had cap space and probably felt good about getting him signed long term, but at the time of his trade he had a 10million QO and was one year away from free agency, the Devils did not know what that next contract was going to look like when they traded for him.

Also then you have to fit a nearly 9 million dollar salary in immediately the following year, which not many contending teams can do (the Devils obviously could). A top line player making 2.9 million is much easier to fit in and teams are starting to wise up to that strategy. Look at the Lightning, paying a premium to have Coleman and Hagel (worse players than Buchnevich) signed for multiple playoff runs at reasonable rates.

It's not about Buchnevich being better than Meier, it's about how many teams can fit him into the lineup and for how long. I said I don't think the Sharks did particularly well in the Meier trade, and I think the reason for that is 1) they knew they had to trade him, 2) the prospect of fitting a 9million dollar player in the next season was a non starter for most teams, and 3) Meier had a lot of control over the situation given his high QO and proximity to free agency. None of those things apply to Buchnevich and so even though he's a slightly lesser (but still top-line) player I think he should return better than Meier.
Forum: Fauteuil - DG17 nov. à 15 h 26
Forum: Armchair-GM16 nov. à 17 h 0
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Mr_Gardoki</b></div><div>Keep Josh Anderson outcho mother-effin mouf! lol But seriously, Josh Anderson is a terrible hockey player.

I know there's growing frustration with Rakell, but the fact is he's still a big part of the success of that 2nd line. The goals will come. Obviously his final totals won't be high, but the goals will come. His skill and ability to push pace, transition and generate scoring chances is above and beyond anyone mentioned in the description.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JuanDamienNebraska</b></div><div>Moving Rakell for any of the names that you mentioned would be a mistake. 60 points last year. His first few games were tough, but he’s clearly been playing hard as of late. He’ll get it going offensively.</div></div>

Underlying numbers are pretty strong too, he's just snakebitten. Not something I would worry about.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>pens1991</b></div><div> the noise will grow if there continues to be a lack of scoring and with that Dubas wouldn't hesitate to make a move.

There is maybe no GM in the league that has more experience tuning out outside noise than Kyle Dubas lol. How many years was he in Toronto and never broke up that core despite people constantly screaming at him to do it? He's aggressive in certain ways but he would have to really hate what Rakell is bringing to try and ship out that contract despite the positive signs everywhere except the scoresheet.
Forum: Armchair-GM10 nov. à 14 h 48
Forum: Armchair-GM8 nov. à 12 h 55
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Mr_Gardoki</b></div><div>Are you out of your mind? Binnington is a mid AF. You should be happy anyone wants to give anything for him. There's a 1st and two 2nds in the deal.

The reality is this trade is dumb as a whole because it's basically a lateral move, and a very EDM trade to make. There's not much separating Binnington and Campbell at this point in their careers.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>SociallyHawkward</b></div><div>I'd honestly take the goalie with slightly worse numbers over the one who throws a hissy fit every time he let's up a soft goal.</div></div>

You guys are talking about their career performances. Edmonton doesn't care about that. Edmonton doesn't care that Binnington was bad last season, or that Campbell was good a couple years ago and that's brought their current numbers pretty close to each other. Edmonton cannot afford to miss the playoffs. They need good goaltending *right now*. Binnington is giving that. Campbell is on waivers. That's where the conversation starts for teams in win now mode.

I understand why one would think it probably won't last with Binnington (I agree) and I certainly don't want to be involved in defending that contract or his general demeanor but to act like swapping Binnington for Campbell wouldn't be a dramatic shot in the arm for a floundering team right now based on how they've played *right now*...I just can't relate to that. Especially when you're basing it off of the career averages of players known to be volatile.
Forum: Armchair-GM6 nov. à 13 h 23
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>A_K</b></div><div>IMO the major problem with Hayes is that there are 2 more years after this one. Even if he can find enough game to excel in the 3C role, is he going to be yet another immovable, declining asset holding the team back until 2027? Because the other "freebie" acquisitions are gone after this year (fingers crossed Army doesn't start another contract extension party). They aren't here and ready now, but Snuggerud, Dean, Bolduc all need to get NHL time in the next couple years and they have Dvorsky and Stenberg that should be ready soon after.

I tend to agree with you on Kyrou - it scares me how many people think he needs to be a Selke guy to be valuable - although I think there is a happy medium where he backchecks without sacrificing all of his offense solely because of his skating. He can get himself to a lot of spots on the ice to disrupt things and still get up the ice on attack. I think it comes down to the mental side, knowing where to be, where the puck is going, etc. - and maybe this is a dissenting opinion but I do think those type of things are teachable.</div></div>

They Hayes thing would worry me more if I thought the Blues were contenders now. If they were a contending team that needed a 3C and they got Hayes and this is how he was performing, that would be concerning. But the Blues aren't that good, and unless Armstrong gets aggressive they're probably not going to be that good for a few years. I think having a veteran center around to soak up some minutes, and shelter the young guys for a few years isn't so bad. Although, like I said, I thought Schenn kinda filled that role already so what can you do.

But as far as "holding the Blues back", I've got five or six contracts I'm more worried about before his, frankly. But certainly if he plays like this through the end of the year though, I won't be as nonchalant about it.
Forum: Armchair-GM6 nov. à 12 h 58
Forum: Armchair-GM6 nov. à 12 h 44
Forum: Armchair-GM6 nov. à 12 h 42
Binnington has been impressive. I was critical of him last year. Obviously the defense was bad but I felt Binnington had to shoulder some of the blame. I don't know how much the new system changes have really affected the Blues' defensively- I still feel they're very porous and the metrics would back that up. But Binnington is papering over those problems in a way he wasn't the last two years. I gotta give him props. I still don't expect him to be a .920+ goalie for the entire year, but if he's above league average that's a very strong development for a goalie that they're paying above league average.

With the offense, I really do think people (maybe including the Blues' front staff) really bought into Vrana/Kapanen/Blais' end of season performances, and ignored the elevated shooting percentages. They were good low cost bets to bring in, but were they a replacement for what Tarasenko and O"Reilly and Barbashev might have brought? I admit even I thought Vrana would be playing a lot better than he has been. I think Hayes is still finding his way, but I do think he's a perfectly serviceable 3C. 3x3.5 for a 3C is not bad.

The big problem with Hayes is that his role is redundant on the team because Schenn is playing like a 3C himself, at least at 5v5. I love his energy, I love what he brings to the table, I think it was a slam dunk to make him Captain. But he's looked over-exposed in the 2C spot this season. I hope it's just a slow start. He's currently on pace for less than 40 points.

I think where the offense has really suffered has been Kyrou. Yes he's been snakebitten. But everyone screaming about how bad he was defensively (on a team with two goalies below .900 and one of the worst defenses in the league) I think failed to consider that if we go down that road with him he might just be a player that ends up good at nothing. His defense has been better, but it's not anything spectacular. And now he's also not scoring. Again, maybe he's starting slow (and he's playing a lot of minutes with Schenn). You don't add a new dimension to your game overnight. But if this holds all year- is it going to have been worth it to turn your 8million dollar 30 goal scorer into a mediocre two way player?
Forum: Armchair-GM2 nov. à 11 h 0
Sujet: Deadline