SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

rush5154

Membre depuis
5 janv. 2018
Équipe favorite
Red Wings de Detroit
Deuxième équipe favorite
Blackhawks de Chicago
Messages dans les forums
235
Messages par jour
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GM25 avr. 2019 à 11 h 52
Sujet: Leafs Cap Problem Illustrated
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>LoganOllivier</b></div><div>Throwing big money at 2 players who have just arrived at the NHL level and haven't at all established what kind of players they are going to be, is a recipe for disaster. Kapanen disappeared in the second half and the playoffs. Johnsson had a few great stretches but still has a lot to prove. Giving them more is what guys like Chiarelli would do. If these guys want that kind of money, trade them, they haven't at all proved they are worth it. I'd give Kapanen a 2 year deal around 2 million and Johnsson either the same or a little more on a 3 year deal but I wouldn't put either above 2.5 million.</div></div>

So basically what Toronto did with Nylander.... He was overpaid. Even resigning those 2 guys at those numbers you wont have enough to give Marner his $10 mil deal he is looking for.
Forum: Armchair-GM11 janv. 2019 à 10 h 43
Sujet: Worst case scenario for the cap everyone is offer sheeted and matched
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rush5154</b></div><div>If what you're saying is true, then Nylander's agent might be the best of all time. How do you convince a GM to pay that amount of money on a 60 point player - who disappears in the playoffs - only for him to be potentially worth it for 4 of the 6 years?

I know the cap has inflated, so dollar for dollar comparisons aren't really that helpful, but percentage of cap when signed is usually the best equalizer when comparing players. The fact is, Nylander's deal in 2018-2019 represented the same percentage of the Leafs' cap (0.9%) that Pastrnak's did in the 2017-2018 season for Boston (0.9%) and that Gaudreau's did (0.9%) in 2016-2017 for Calgary. No one could/should ever argue that Nylander is on par with either Gaudreau or Patsrnak - he's a level below them and I don't want to hear the "we'll he could be as good as them" argument. No - he won't because he's not that type of player. He can be invisible at times and has the benefit of playing with a generational player (Matthews). When he doesn't play with Matthews, he barely produces. Gaudreau and Pastrnak play with elite players, but I think we can all agree that Matthews is going to have a more impactful career (except maybe Bergeron, but Bergeron is a 2-way forward so comparing them is pointless) than those guys and Nylander gets to benefit from it. Marner - on the other hand - is capable of taking good players and getting them career years (JVR, Bozak, even the fourth line got points from him last year) and is worth every dollar he gets. Nylander is still young, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt to prove me wrong, but for those who think this guy will be a perennial 80 point player you're dreaming.</div></div>

You have it all figured out don't you.

Here is the thing and that is happening.

Young high end talent, of which Nylander absolutely is that, aren't settling for below market value coming out of their ELC's. No one had a problem with JVR or Evander Kane getting 7 mill a season and Nylander is better than either of those players. But Nylander is only so he gets the "you haven't paid your dues" nonsense that many people have. I am so sick of people looking for every possible reason to make Nylander look like crap. Compare him to Pastrnak or Gudreau or whoever, you are missing the point and are just looking for a reason to crap on the Leafs.

The reality is Gudreau is underpaid, so is Pastrnak. So is McKinnon and many other star players. There is going to be a very big swing in how secondary and depth players get paid. Top end talent will get paid top end money and secondary and depth guys (guys who can't put up big numbers on their own) will get paid way less than they currently do. Why? Because teams won't be able to afford to through bad money at depth guys who are easier to find and replace with young talent.

Watch what happens in Colorado soon. McKinnon is by far the best player on his team, its not even close, and yet, Rantanen is going go get a 10 million dollar a year max deal thrown at him. Then in a few years when McKinnon's contract is up for renewal he'll get a massive deal that'll pay him for his prime years that he will soon be exiting and then Colorado is going to have a huge problem on their hands.

A players prime runs from 23is - about 30 before they start sliding. Its a young mans game in this era and that is becoming more and more real each year. So if your best hockey occurs in your mid 20's, why would young players leave money on the table leaving their ELC's? It just doesn't which is why McDavid, Eichel, Pastrnak, etc got term, they see that a shift is coming. Guys like Doughty, Tavares, Seguin etc getting huge 8 year deals in their late 20's will soon be a thing of the past because its not a good plan. These guys got huge deals for what they did in their best years and they'll never live up to the contracts. Look at Chicago and Anaheim as proof. Term and high cap hits for guys who are declining.
Forum: Armchair-GM10 janv. 2019 à 10 h 35
Sujet: The only TDL trade we should make
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rush5154</b></div><div>All great points you've raised here.

You're right, there's no guarantee and the current playoff format will - again - eliminate a top 6 team in the second round.

In terms of previous adds that may have put a contending team over the top, Carter and Gaborik to LA gave them some finishing abilities and speed, respectively, in addition to their heavy play style. Other than that - I think you're right modernly speaking. Martin St.Louis to NYR didn't guarantee a win, neither did adding Eric Staal a few years later. Rick Nash to Boston didn't guarantee a win. Iginla to Pittsburgh didn't guarantee a win.

My only critique would be that the Leafs have done this small, depth adds for two years in a row now. First with Boyle, then with Pleckanec. Neither of these moves addressed the defense and neither of these moves allowed them to get out of the first round. Maybe if Carolina falls out of the playoff race (they've won 5 in a row however) the Leafs can meet somewhere in the middle. Acquire a 3-4 defenceman on cap certainty for picks, prospects and maybe one roster player. But, even that may be unattainable if the Leafs have to sacrifice winger depth like Johnsson or Kapanen.</div></div>

Agreed. I hated the Plekanec deal last year. Boyle I didn't mind as much and he filled more holes. And I agree with the LAK trade assessment too.

I think where Dubas is in the biggest bind is Marner. I love the kid but he's likely handcuffing the Leafs right now. He's pretty much refusing to sign an extension in-season and everything I know about him and his camp tells me that they want Matthews to sign first so they can piggyback off his number the way Draisatl did with McDavid. On the other hand...I think Matthews' camp is sitting there waiting for the leafs to offer a deal as they care much less about what number Marner comes in at.

This is significant because I don't think Dubas wants to sacrifice any major futures for a deadline rental. If M&amp;M numbers come in on the high end...those futures will be more valuable as you need bodies that can contribute on ELC's. I think Dubas would love to get in on talks for Pietrangelo...and probably has already done so...but without knowing the cap hit for M&amp;M, can't take on the risk of adding another contract for next season. That's why I think it's safer to stay away from bigger trade deals this TDL...take your lumps next year with what will probably be a lower skilled d-group, and re-group the following year. Marner getting signed to a reasonable contract before this year's TDL would change everything, IMO
Forum: Armchair-GM9 janv. 2019 à 18 h 17
Sujet: The only TDL trade we should make
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rush5154</b></div><div>The Leafs are in a bit of a predicament. On the one hand, the fan base and analysts have been calling for a upgrade to be made on the defensive core for two years now. It hasn't been addressed - to date - and we all know what happened against Boston last year in the playoffs.

On the other hand, Tampa made a huge swing last year acquiring JT Miller and Ryan McDonaugh, and it got them within one game of the Cup finals but not all the way there. Granted - they are an absolutely wagon this year and are more experienced for another run with those pieces added.

So what does Toronto do? They need to get out of the first round of the playoffs to start, and I think that will happen. However, without a significant add or two by the TDL I don't see Toronto beating Tampa unless a key injury occurs to Tampa (Vasilevsky or Hedman or Kucherov, etc.). Should Toronto be patient like Tampa has been and keep adding and have continued regular season and some playoff season success (but no cups since 2003-2004) or do they show the fan base they can make a run with the cap space they have? It'll be interesting to see what transpires...</div></div>

Every year in hockey, there’s at least 5-6 teams who are considered cup contenders. A lot of times any of the 16 teams that qualify have a punchers chance.

Would it be overly surprising to anyone if Nashville, San Jose, Winnipeg, Tampa, Vegas, Washington, Pittsburgh or Toronto won?

All have great teams, all have some warts.

In a hypothetical universe, let’s say San Jose puts Karlsson on the block and the Leafs can pick him up for a first, Sandin and Kapanen (troll disclaimer: no, I don’t think EK is available nor would that offer be near enough.). Would the leafs adding EK to their blue line guarantee anything?

Would it make them head and shoulders above Tampa who they’d have to get past in the 2nd round at the earliest?

No. There’s never any guarantees. I’m hard pressed to think of any MAJOR deadline acquisition that catapulted a team from ‘one of the contenders’ to Cup champs.

Maybe Bourque to Colorado? Avalanche were already a cup favourite but that’s the only example that comes to mind.

IMO, deadline is best for adding complimentary and depth pieces to an already good team, or for restructuring teams to offload vets for futures. Not for contending teams to sell the farm to add a stud in hopes the few weeks you have him for get you a ring.
Forum: Armchair-GM9 janv. 2019 à 17 h 35
Sujet: The only TDL trade we should make
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rush5154</b></div><div>The Leafs are in a bit of a predicament. On the one hand, the fan base and analysts have been calling for a upgrade to be made on the defensive core for two years now. It hasn't been addressed - to date - and we all know what happened against Boston last year in the playoffs.

On the other hand, Tampa made a huge swing last year acquiring JT Miller and Ryan McDonaugh, and it got them within one game of the Cup finals but not all the way there. Granted - they are an absolutely wagon this year and are more experienced for another run with those pieces added.

So what does Toronto do? They need to get out of the first round of the playoffs to start, and I think that will happen. However, without a significant add or two by the TDL I don't see Toronto beating Tampa unless a key injury occurs to Tampa (Vasilevsky or Hedman or Kucherov, etc.). Should Toronto be patient like Tampa has been and keep adding and have continued regular season and some playoff season success (but no cups since 2003-2004) or do they show the fan base they can make a run with the cap space they have? It'll be interesting to see what transpires...</div></div>

With the cap issues we are facing next season I think it’s more wise to wait and see what we have in defence next season. It will be just as easy to trade a player who is signed next year as it is to trade rfa rights this season.

I think it’s unfair to put the blame solely on the defence last year. Digging that hole in the first round was a team effort.
Forum: Armchair-GM2 janv. 2019 à 12 h 25
Sujet: 2019-20
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>rush5154</b></div><div>The way things are trending, what you proposed for your RFA signings of Marner, Matthews, Kapanen and Johnsson seem to be in the ball park of what they'll end up signing for. However, each signed contract has massive downstream implications. Regardless of what people say, the Leafs caved and gave Nylander more than he deserved (he's a 6.5 million dollar player max, which includes cap inflation when compared to Ehlers, Patrnak, etc.). But if the Leafs "cave" again and give Matthews more than 11.5 million and Marner more than 9 million then I don't know how this team addresses their number one concern = defence. Gardiner is gone as of July 1st, but all that newly gained cap space will go into Matthews' and Marner's contracts. The only way to augment the defence is to trade for one because they can't afford to sign a big name UFA. So is the casualty someone like Connor Brown and picks and prospects - we'll have to see. The current Leafs defence can't go far in the playoffs (they can't defend Tampa's offense and they'll inevitably meet in Round 2 - this year or next year), and if it's the same recipe for 2019-2020 I can't see them going far in the playoffs then either.</div></div>

Very good points and I do agree. I think it would be wise to wait till the off season and maybe even after preseason to address the defence. Think we will have a better idea then what we will be looking for.

As far as getting by Tampa it’s a tall order for sure. With the very small sample size of one game against them so far I think we out performed them but vasilevskiy stole that game. When playoffs come I have no doubt that the games will be much tighter. I just think any sort of big move now will hurt us in the future.
Forum: Armchair-GM4 oct. 2018 à 13 h 29
Sujet: I want some of what Dubas is smoking
Comparing Toronto's situation to Chicago's proves that you fundamentally don't understand how to operate in a salary cap.

Here is the situation in Chicago.

They underpaid Toews, Kane and Seabrook when they were in their early 20's and were dominating the league. The money they saved on them, they put into overpaying playoff folk heroes and aging vets. Then after their stars carried the team to 3 championships, they paid their stars huge money when they were entering their 30's. Now their stars are good but not super elite anymore and because they have several other bad contracts, they just can't compete.

Now in the case of Toronto, they are in a much better position, they don't have any bad contracts and draft better than most teams in the league (They are right there with Winnipeg). So giving the stars star money at a point in their career where we can expect them to only get better isn't a problem. It makes the most sense from a value point of view. Players in the NHL on average, have their statistically best season around the age of 24 (look it up with any 10 higher end players), and continue to play close to that level through their 20's before declining in their 30's. The rate of decline varies (see crosby vs Perry, Crosby is still elite in his early 30's while Perry is an 8 million + 3rd liner). So with that in mind, TO can lock up their 3 prized young guys for long term contracts that will provide the highest level of value for the team. (Meaning, they'll get paid fairly for their best years, instead of getting paid what they deserved for what they did in their best years.)

Chicago is paying their core for what they did in the good old days. Toronto will be paying their stars top dollar for their best years, not the years that follow. Chicago is like LA, paying guys for the glory days that are long gone.
Forum: Armchair-GM27 juin 2018 à 8 h 46
Sujet: Lineup, Trades and Signings
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>brendanchisholm98</b></div><div>Wrong. With the cap likley going up a couple million and expiring contracts the Leafs will have between 20 and 25 mill to spend on marner matthews and the rest of their roster next year. Leafs are in a great cap position to sign Tavares.</div></div>

Well if you flip over to your Long Term Outlook tab, you will see that the Leafs will have 62.297 committed to their roster for 2019-20. With no other team coming into the NHL this season, the cap is not going to see increase benefit of that additional revenue. So let's say optimistic and 3mill increase. Leafs have ~20 mill. So with that contract you gave Tavares, optimistically give Auston the same (though he will likely get more). So now you have 9 mill left and Marner if your lucky signs a short term bridge for less money in a "continue to prove it" scenario. But thats if the Leafs sign him this off-season. They wait and he steps up again and hits 75/80 points, you are now cap screwed. Maybe you have mill or so to replace Kapanen (who will get a few mill), one more F, 2D and a backup G just to be able to the capability of icing a full lineup (let alone your scratches, relief space for trades and call-ups, trade maneuverability, etc.)
Forum: Armchair-GM18 juin 2018 à 10 h 58
Sujet: dubas
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Juice</b></div><div>Definitely agree with you on Thornton not being a great fit on the Leafs....the reason you likely see a lot of Leaf teams adding him is likely due to the fact that we have excess cap space, just for this coming season...before Matthews and Marner numbers skyrocket in 19-20.

Leafs also have a glaring need for bottom 6 C. So a lot of fans figure they can use this year's excess cap space to get big Joe for one year. The reasoning is sound but the player is likely not the best answer.</div></div>

I wholeheartedly agree about Joe Thornton. He is an aging centre coming off a pretty brutal injury. His game doesn't match up well with how the Leafs play a quick transitional game and who knows how much game time he will see this season anyway. I think at the 3C and 4C you would look to acquire a Riley Nash and Jay Beagle, both good defensively who can win faceoffs and add some grit.