SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

UpsideDownQue

Membre depuis
11 août 2017
Équipe favorite
Avalanche du Colorado
Messages dans les forums
8440
Messages par jour
3.5
Forum: Armchair-GM9 mars à 14 h 31
Sujet: Hmmm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TheeDjeeEem</b></div><div>It's almost like CBJ are the worst team in the conference and Philly are a playoff team

And that sample size is literally half his teammates mins

Peeke is a good shot blocker, big and physical, exactly what you need on a playoff 3rd pair playing 13 mins a night with a competent partner and forward group and exactly useless on a team like CBJ where no one is moving the puck outside of Werenski

Walker moves the puck better but not well, has played with better teammates this year, did not crack LA's playoff roster last year, and isn't a piece that COL really needed to over pay for in a deal with RyJo and a '25 1st rounder

The Peeke trade for a <strong>2027 </strong>3rd, it's only 1 example of a better trade, let's do the Tanev deal for a 2nd + DD prospect at less than half the cap hit of Walker... Get Tanev for COL '26 1st + Malinski? is so much better

Get Tanev at 1.125M and [you dont <strong>have </strong>to] dump RyJo to another team now or in the summer or next year, so many cheaper options

Calgary sold Hanifin at a 1.237M cap hit for a '26 1st and '24 2nd ffs lol

Terrible value. Bad trade.</div></div>

Even last year Peeke was one of the worst PKers on the team so it's not a sample size issue, he's just a terrible penalty killer. Last year Walker was one of the best PKers on LA. You can't really use the "bad team" argument when Peeke is literally the one dragging their PK down the most

You can disagree on the trade value or targets, Im just talking about Walker and Peeke's PK abilities
Forum: Armchair-GM9 mars à 13 h 10
Sujet: Hmmm
Forum: Armchair-GM6 mars à 18 h 53
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dannibalcorpse</b></div><div>We thought we'd never see it again...

but "Mike Reilly for a 3rd" trades are <em><strong>BACK</strong></em>, baby!!

Isles accept, I would think. Aho or Bolduc can just get sheltered in that LD3 slot, or they can bring in another 6/7th type for a late round pick.

Ned at 3rd round value feels a little spicy - I don't think there are many legit contenders looking for goalie help (out of the teams currently in playoff position, I think maybe the Flyers, Kings or Leafs would be looking but that's it - in the east, Boston/Tampa/Florida/NYR/Canes are set, and the Wings probably wouldn't be itching to bring Ned back in; out west, Dallas/Winnipeg/Nashville/Vegas/Vancouver are set, &amp; Edmonton doesn't have the space) so you might be able to push down to a 4th here, maybe throw conditions on it that turn it into a 3rd if Ned plays 50.1% of the playoffs or something like that.</div></div>

It was surprisingly hard for me to find a good 3LD trade target besides Reilly. There are a lot of RDs reportedly available but on LD its pretty bare aside from the high end guys like Hanifin and Chychrun. Theres Edmundson but he has 0 skating ability

Ned for a 4th would be even better. PIT apparently wants prospects instead of picks for Guentzel so I wasnt sure if they would prefer the same for Ned. Id be ok with the 4th -&gt; conditional 3rd but they would have to wait until 2025 (or 2026 in this case if the 2025 pick is going to NYI). If they want a prospect instead thats fine too as long as its nothing crazy
Forum: Armchair-GM26 févr. à 23 h 39
Sujet: Three 3Cs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>swissmontana</b></div><div>Yeah, I can think of a team that wants a big veteran RHD with cup experience (Colorado). Why sell something more valuable than the centers that we are trading for?

If the Avs ran a 21 man roster, they'd actually be running an 19 man roster. Ambulanche and all that.

I like the idea of either Arizona Center but not both. This is spending a first to be forced to offload either a top 4 defenseman (not ideal) or sell one of the two centers you picked up (not ideal). The returns will not be good.</div></div>

It all depends on which UFAs you can attract. If they can get a good deal on a D man for 2-3M then it makes sense to move Manson. If they can get a good deal on a C then it would make sense to flip Kerfoot. If they can get a good deal on a G then it would make sense to either flip Allen or maybe trade for a different goalie entirely

The Avs upcoming cap crunch is not exclusive to this trade idea. They will have to sacrifice depth at either C, D, or G next season regardless (unless they find great value UFAs or pay for retention). Even if they have to flip one of their acquisitions in the offseason they still got a playoff run out of them so its not like its just wasted assets. Id rather pay to fill all of the Avs holes and have a better chance at another cup this season than not add someone and leave a hole in the lineup just because we would get less value in a trade to flip them after the playoff run - maybe its not ideal to have to flip them but its also not ideal to only trade for one C and have to play Olofsson as a 4C for a playoff run