SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

mytduxfan

Membre depuis
25 janv. 2017
Équipe favorite
Ducks d'Anaheim
Messages dans les forums
1460
Messages par jour
0.5
Forum: Armchair-GM26 juin 2020 à 21 h 5
Forum: Armchair-GM26 juin 2020 à 20 h 19
Sujet: NHL 20 Trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Vanderm</b></div><div>Kylington is a real NHLer with upside still. He needs to be paired with a bigger bodied stay at home partner and be told to drive the play. That’s his game. Great skater, can get by the first forechecker and hit a pass well. Just doesn’t have much chance to do that with CGY.

I don’t know much about Lundestrom, just adding some Kylington commentary. He’s a worthwhile bet for a team that can afford a 2nd round pick (or less) to obtain him. He’s a Seattle expansion draft candidate if he’s still on CGY’s roster next summer.</div></div>

Fair enough and I agree on your assessment of Kylington and where his abilities are placed i.e. skating. Unfortunately, I just think, compared to other prospects, Kylington has never really excelled at any level he's played at. He's just a very average player. I think he's a borderline NHLer and will continue to be unless something drastically changes. He might have had an easier shot at the NHL if he was a righty, but he's not. Meanwhile, Lundestrom has some solid potential and was really selected because of the high floor. I don't think that Lundestrom sets the world on fire, but I think he could be a complete 2/3C who is solid in all areas and really excels on the defensive end and in high pressure situations. IMO, Lundestrom doesn't have the physical tools to be a top player, but the skill and hockey IQ is extremely high.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 juin 2020 à 20 h 6
Sujet: The way up
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>kogger</b></div><div>Buddy you thinking Vancouver could win the cup is pretty moronic.... and Vancouver is not in a playoff spot; they have to win the play in against the Wild to make playoffs then the pick goes down in value goes depending on how far they make it (given Markstroms status its pretty doubtful, and players can get hurt but hey you never know) Its comical how if I give a hypothetical situation its deemed stupid but your hypotheticals are concrete? bruv....

Did OTT trade Karlsson for a single pick hoping and praying it would be top 5? No! - pretty sure they would hope for a top 5 pick considering EK65 is a generational talent defenseman, and would want someone who could start in the lineup right away. The fact that they gave him to the Sharks on the condition that SJ makes the playoffs last year for this years pick was pretty ****ing genius actually considering the Sharks last season were pretty good, now that they lost Pavelski, Jumbo, and most likely will need goaltending that will bite them (NPI), and other pending UFAs, if you reversed it and said Did SJ trade for Karlsson for a pick hoping and praying that their pick wouldnt be top 5? sure that makes sense but they paid their own price and its costing them 11.5 mill a season.

In a trade for Lindholm, that VAN pick would be valued at the 20-30 range and would be additional piece in a return that contained multiple other assets. - look im not saying that the deal above gets lindholm, its a sweetener for sure especially if VAN loses the play in and you have 2 1st rounders next season and could potentially be in the same position as OTT is now (having 2 top 5 picks again this is purely hypothetical...could it happen? sure will it? probably not...but to say that its stupid makes you look stupid because you don't know wtf is gonna happen)

The OTT-SJS trade is a great example of why you shouldn't trade 1st round picks that don't have conditions on their position within the draft. - Conditions: Ottawa receives Sharks 2019 1st round pick if Sharks do not make the playoffs. If Sharks make the playoffs, Ottawa receives Sharks 2020 1st.
*Result: Sharks made the 2019 playoffs, Ottawa receives Sharks 2020 1st round pick..... these conditions here are modified slightly of the VAN conditions - SJ makes playoffs OTT gets next seasons pick, VAN makes playoffs this seasons pick is granted to us. However, VANCOUVER IS NOT IN A PLAYOFF SPOT RIGHT NOW. THEY HAVE TO BEAT MINNESOTA FOR US TO GET THAT PICK FOR THIS SEASON. Should they lose, it becomes an interesting pick for 2021. <a href="https://www.tsn.ca/vancouver-canucks-first-round-pick-transfers-to-new-jersey-devils-if-they-make-playoffs-1.1481652" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.tsn.ca/vancouver-canucks-first-round-pick-transfers-to-new-jersey-devils-if-they-make-playoffs-1.1481652</a>

It is also a good example of why you shouldn't trade quality players for 1st round picks that don't have conditions on them regarding their position within the draft. This is basic stuff - Correct me if I'm wrong but OTT was a dumpster fire that had a lot of drama in the locker room with Hoffman, EK65, and others. EK65 wanted to leave OTT so they didn't have a choice because he would walk in FA... We did the exact same thing with Hall and could potentially end up with 2 picks in the top 10 (Zona covered their ass and made sure it was lotto protected, if they are granted a top 3 pick that pick its theirs). Keep in mind if that happens, Zonas pick for next season is lotto unprotected as well.

Bottom line - no shot in hell the devils land Lindholm regardless of the picks in our possession. I genuinely think hes on Murrays no trade list.</div></div>

TLDR
Forum: Armchair-GM26 juin 2020 à 12 h 12
Sujet: The way up
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>kogger</b></div><div>your take is just as dumb for saying it could end up being 31st OA lol like pump the brakes on the ego there kid.... look at what the Senators did with the sharks pick; its very likely they will be picking back to back or at least within proximity of each other.... they took a risk and it will most likely pay off</div></div>

What are you on about? Vancouver are still in the playoffs. If they win the cup, that pick is 31st OA. 31st OA for Lindholm would be an absolutely god awful return. Hence, it is completely moronic to suggest that VAN 2020 1st alone is even close to the value of Lindholm. Just because you have this made up scenario in your head, doesn't mean it will happen. Is ANA's 2020 1st worth the same as 1st OA because I believe we will win the lottery? No... just dumb.

Yeah, look at the OTT-SJS trade! Did OTT trade Karlsson for a single pick hoping and praying it would be top 5? No! In a trade for Lindholm, that VAN pick would be valued at the 20-30 range and would be additional piece in a return that contained multiple other assets. The OTT-SJS trade is a great example of why you shouldn't trade 1st round picks that don't have conditions on their position within the draft. It is also a good example of why you shouldn't trade quality players for 1st round picks that don't have conditions on them regarding their position within the draft. This is basic stuff.
Forum: Armchair-GM24 juin 2020 à 8 h 48
Sujet: Best Case Scenario
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Timmah007</b></div><div>I’d pass for oilers. <strong>Not sure I’d do neal straight up</strong>. Since it’s adding a year tern.</div></div>

LFMAO!!! Good one. You're clearly clueless when it comes to ANA and its players. 2-for-2 on nonsensical comments recently.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jah1722</b></div><div>Please no to that EDM trade. AA isn’t good and you gave him more than Silf makes plus took on Neal. Took on 5M, gave up the best player in the deal and only got a 3rd.</div></div>

I know, right? Silf getting treated like a cap dump, even though he's one of the few players performing on a crappy team. James Neal's contract is awful. AA is streaky at best. EZ pass.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DirtyDangle</b></div><div>way too much for colorado</div></div>

Take out Kaut and it's fair. However, I'd hold onto Rakell and move him for more to a team struggling to get under cap.
Forum: Armchair-GM24 juin 2020 à 7 h 50
Sujet: Top 10 Ducks Prospects
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Foreskin_Gump</b></div><div>He’s been underwhelming in the NHL. Still has some upside but the players above him are rightfully so.</div></div>

Whilst I agree, I think your ranking is a little harsh. I mean, BOG has looked good, but only at the junior level and he's ranked higher than Lundestrom who is playing at the adult level. I think Lundestrom gets a little too much stick IMO. The kid is only 20 and coming from a softer league. It is going to take time for him to adjust and he's had some injuries to deal with. Moreover, he's clearly being developed as a two-way 2C/3C with a high-level defensive game. Those skills take more time to develop. I still have high hopes for him and believe he has the potential to be an elite shutdown C with a solid 2-way game i.e. a poor mans ROR. Hopefully he pans out as we'd have a lethal set of centres, especially if we are lucky enough to add Byfield or Stutzle this year. Byfield/Stutzle - Zegras - Lundestrom- BOG would be insane!

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>AFOX10900</b></div><div>Thrun and LaCombe are a lot better than Axel, I wouldn't put Jones that high either, I don't think he has all that much upside</div></div>

Agreed on Lacombe and Thrun. Both look to be excellent D-men with NHL potential, whilst AA is borderline for me. Jones probably shouldn't be on the list at this point. However, I don't see him being more than a bottom 6er. I'd put everyone except Tracey, Mahura and AA above him.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Richard88</b></div><div>Which of these prospects would you be ok trading for Jost? Either in a 1-for-1 or in a prospect+pick package.

Just curious to see how you value your prospects, and which one, if any, might be of interest in a trade.</div></div>

Probably BOG, Tracey and Jones.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>I'm not going to respond specifically to that because I just can't get energized thinking about trading for Jost. Instead, I'll respond about our prospects generally and let my colleagues <a href="/users/AFOX10900" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@AFOX10900</a> and <a href="/users/mytduxfan" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@mytduxfan</a> weigh in on my opinions.

In general, I think that our best assets to trade (meaning those players I think would bring back the best return) are Rickard Rakell, Max Jones, Jacob Larsson and Josh Mahura, depending upon what level of player or asset we were trying to acquire.

I'd rate all of our prime LD prospects currently ahead of Andersson, but I still think AA is going to get to the NHL eventually. I'd rate the LDs Larsson, Mahura, Guhle, Thrun and LaCombe.

I think that Troy Terry is a better prospect than Max Jones, and that's at a position at which we are much thinner (RW), so we're not trading him.

Overall, I'd say we're overstocked at LW and LD, adequately stocked at C and G, understocked at RW and out of stock at RD, although I see both Hakanpaa and Andersson as playable.

That's why my draft board would be Lucas Raymond/Jamie Drysdale/Alex Holtz with our first pick and Helge Grans/Tyson Foerster/Topi Niemela with our second pick (unless one of the more-highly-rated RDs is a faller).</div></div>

Hmmmm... I would say we're only "overstocked" at LW, but not at LD. I think we're solid at GT and have a decent pool of Cs and LDs. We're definitely weak at RW and RD. The issue with our prospect pool and the reason I am hesitant to say we are "overstocked" at LD is that we really lack elite potential. IMO, for us to be "overstocked", we really need at least some 1st line talent. I'd say we have that at LW with Comtois, but don't see the same at LD. We have it at C with Zegras too, but, for me at least, you can never have too many Cs.

If we end up at #5-7 range with our first pick, I think Raymond + Grans/Niemla would be a great haul.
Forum: Armchair-GM23 juin 2020 à 13 h 40
Sujet: Trading Lindholm Rakell and Manson
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>moli92</b></div><div>I know the Rakell for Timmins + 1st was talked about a lot on here months ago but now with COVID and the flat cap I think the market changed. Lots of teams will be needing to sell players to fit under the cap and I would rather go after someone like Killorn/Palat who could be had for much less in a trade. Not really interested in Rakell at that price</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Richard88</b></div><div>Yeah I came down to the comment section to say the same thing.

The only way I'd be open to trading Timmins would be if we acquire a top RHD like Pietrangelo that makes Timmins expendable, but that's really unlikely to happen.

Other teams with less capspace will likely value Rakell's low cap hit much more than Avs do, so are likely to price us out of a Rakell trade.

And as moli92 said, there will be much better deals available on the trade market and free agency that won't mortgage our future. Timmins and that 1st (eg. Reichel/Peterka/Brisson/etc) are going to be really important in phase 2 of our cup window beyond 2023. Would rather go for Killorn/Palat on the cheap than losing Timmins.

To put it another way...

Timmins + 1st = Rakell
2nd + 3rd = Killorn/Palat

... I'd rather have Killorn/Palat + Timmins + 1st, than Rakell + 2nd + 3rd.</div></div>

If you'd prefer Killorn/Palat at a lower price, that is fine, but Rakell is absolutely worth Timmins + 1st. I don't think we'd trade him for anything less. In fact, from what you're saying about team's being desperate to get under cap, I think it is safe to assume that Rakell (and his sweetheart deal) is worth a lot more now. Nice!!!!

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>SammyT_51</b></div><div>I wouldnt think so. Liljegren is still only barely 21 years old and is amazing prospect and surely a top-4 D in a year or two. Liljegren is ready. But he needs to wait a year to go straight into top-4 since we have bunch of bottom-4 Dmen currently. I see him playing 30 minutes a night on Marlies in 20/21 and then Muzzin pairing in 21/22 right at the age of 22/23 where those young top-4 Ds hit their stride on NHL level.</div></div>

Means nothing because progression isn't linear. Liljegren could dominate the AHL next year and then implode at the NHL level. He wouldn't be the first and won't be the last D-man to struggle to make the jump. I mean just look at Fleury, Honka, Zboril, all of whom were drafted higher than Liljegren, had solid AHL numbers, and can't stick it at the NHL level. Not saying it happens. The point is that there is a risk with Liljegren that needs to be compensated for.
Forum: Armchair-GM19 juin 2020 à 19 h 28
Forum: Armchair-GM19 juin 2020 à 19 h 27
Sujet: Offseason of the offseason
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>AFOX10900</b></div><div>I mean... Do we really need a third pair guy, like we already have Guddy and Hakanpaa, like Axel will probably be a small step up over them if he develops properly, but there's always a chance he doesn't, and I'd say it's worth giving up a potential bottom pair guy for a really good top 4 guy outside of BUF, and a still decent confirmed bottom pair guy, even in BUF</div></div>

Well... I think we do need a 3rd pairing guy right now (MDZ's contract ends this year and Irwin/Hakanpaa aren't very good. So we have Manson and Gudbranson and then..... *shrugs*... none of those guys should be on the PP anyway). I am not saying that Axel is that guy right now, but he could be in the future. He's a prospect and only 20 years old. He likely isn't going to make the NHL next year. I mean, Axel is young and cheap. Could he struggle to make the NHL? Sure! But he's the best RHD prospect we have right now and has plenty of time to grow. He isn't costing us an arm and a leg, so why not just wait and see what happens? We're not contending next year and probably not the season after either. We have time to wait for him to develop.

As far as Miller, I'd say he's a bottom pairing PP specialist. I mean, he was that in BOS and LV, and has continued to play the role in BUF. He certainly wasn't a top 4D in BOS or LV. Always 5th highest overall and getting the 2nd, sometimes 3rd, most PP minutes. Would he make our team better now? Probably, but, considering that our core so poor right now, I don't think it would really matter. Therefore, IMO, we're probably better off holding onto the kids and hoping they pan out into something good.
Forum: Armchair-GM19 juin 2020 à 19 h 6
Sujet: Fixing top 6 but keeping our firsts
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>My question was directed at my esteemed Anaheim colleague <a href="/users/mytduxfan" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">@mytduxfan</a> . I construed his comment (in response to yours, which is why I included it) as saying "that's pretty low for me, I'd pass" to yours, which I construed as Rakell for a top prospect and a first from 16-24. There has been a lot of discussion about a trade of Rakell for Timmins and Colorado's first (presumably somewhere between 28 and 31) and most of us Ducks guys like that.</div></div>

Whoops... another late night misread. I only read the part about a "1st in the late teens". A top prospect + late 1st would be within the range of return I'd expect for Rakell. Depending on the prospect, it would probably be the minimum I'd expect. However, definitely within the range of potential deals. Kind of like my view on Timmins + 1st. It's not something I'd accept personally as I think it's a little too low for me right now, but, at the same time, I wouldn't be disappointed or felt we got shafted if such a deal were to be made. It would fall within the range, but be on the lower side of the return value scale for me. Meanwhile, 7th OA is a the top end of what I think you can expect for Rakell. Although, like I said, that deal would never happen because no team with 7th OA needs Rakell.
Forum: Armchair-GM18 juin 2020 à 14 h 28
Sujet: Fixing top 6 but keeping our firsts
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>OldNYIfan</b></div><div>As much as I love Rakell, and as much as I love my Ducks, Rakell doesn't = 7th overall pick. Maybe Anaheim adds Jacob Larsson?

I don't think it makes sense for Buffalo to trade that pick. Here's a deal I could live with that doesn't cost you it:
Jokiharju
2020 second
2021 second

{That may be the first time I've ever used those two pronouns in succession}</div></div>

I think the value is there. I mean, when you're drafting wingers between 5-10 you'd be pretty happy if they turn out to be 30 goalscorers... of course, there is always that risk that they may not. Having said that, any team with a top 10 pick shouldn't move it for Rakell. That makes no sense.

Would love a deal around Rakell for Jokiharju+. I'd take that deal in a heartbeat.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Xqb15</b></div><div>Yeah I don’t think you give up the 7th overall but a top prospect and a 1st in the late teens early twenties is what I was thinking.</div></div>

That's pretty low for me. I'd pass.