SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

nativewulf

Membre depuis
6 nov. 2020
Équipe favorite
Predators de Nashville
Messages dans les forums
279
Messages par jour
0.2
Forum: Armchair-GM3 avr. à 17 h 35
Sujet: Nightmare scenario - dropping to third
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Emil_Ismo</b></div><div>Moving into the top-3 of any draft would be expensive. I actually based this on a proposals from Montreal fans (one here earlier today, and one I saw one twitter a couple of days ago) with really the only difference being that I removed a prospect going to the Sharks that they included in theirs.</div></div>

No offense to the fan that posted that, but that's a bad proposal. I'd love to hear the reasoning for paying that much to move up 3 spots in a draft where at 6OA you might be able to get someone like Eiserman, Silayev, Buium, Parekh, Catton, or Dickinson all depending on who falls. Moving into the top 3 is expensive, but not that expensive when the draft is deep at a couple of positions all in the top 15.
Forum: Armchair-GM20 mars à 12 h 18
Sujet: should the leafs be bounced in rd 1
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Leafsfan98</b></div><div>I think an extension would be in place with Marner, but this trade doesn't make sense for either team as TO doesn't need Saros and Marner&gt;Forsberg so there's no point in adding Hirvonen and NSH needs Saros...

I think a better deal would be MM (with extension)+2 4rth for Forsberg+Fabbro (with extension)+2027 1st+mid prospect

Comp is here M. Tkachuk
Forsberg = Huberdeau (Hubby was coming off an 115 point season)
Fabbro&lt;</div></div>

While I understand your comparison and trade evaluations Nash still wouldn't touch that deal. Whatever Marner's extension comes in at would be over 10 mil easily. I would rather pay Forsberg 8.5 for the next 6 then whatever Marner would look to make, probably over 11mil if we're being honest for the next 8. And it's definitely not worth adding a 1st and Fabbro. The difference in production of Forsberg and Marner isn't enough to consider giving up other pieces of the roster or futures. Marner has 76 points this year and Forsberg has 74. Forsberg has also played in every game this year and is one of the more clutch scorers tied for the lead in the NHL in overtime and game winners, He also has more playoff experience. He also plays with an edge and frequently uses his bigger frame to push other players around. Marner is a great player, but not worth losing Forsberg. An extension doesn't change the fact that he's already paid too much and will look to make just as much going forward, whereas Forsberg is on a very fair deal which is easier to build around going forward
Forum: Trade Machine Proposals15 mars à 13 h 40
Sujet: Possible goalie solution NJ
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Element23VM</b></div><div>To think that Nashville is going to get a lot more than this for Askarov at this point is going to surprise a few people should he get moved.

It doesn't make sense for Nashville to keep both goaltenders but they're in no hurry, so some of you are correct in that you have to be enticed... that's true.

What, however, is not calculated, is how many other targets there are that drives down your price, and you want to sell when the selling is good. This is what NJ would offer and not more than this. They're going to make the rounds until they get the right goalie *at the right price*</div></div>

I understand your thinking on the first two points to a degree. Where I think you're wrong is the number of targets available driving down his price. There are no targets like Askarov. The guys you're talking about are older and declining. Askarov has his whole career in front of him and the only good comparable would be Wallstedt. His price is what it is because if he's available he's a unicorn. Fitzy has his price he wants to pay and that's fine. Trotz has his and he won't budge. We have something NJ wants and Trotz isn't going to cave because he's selling something that doesn't have to be sold and he has the bargaining power.