Membre depuis
24 sept. 2019
Équipe favorite
Sharks de San Jose
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
Forum: Armchair-GM4 juin à 16 h 53
Forum: Armchair-GM4 juin à 16 h 49
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>RecycleShark</b></div><div>I think you could add another top 4 RD and still have room for Thrun, Shakir, and Emberson.

Make room by moving out any of the other RD: Rutta, Burroughs, Benning.</div></div>

I already have Carrier, Shakir, Emberson, Thrun as 4 tho?

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>themostleaf33</b></div><div>See? now you understand how bias it is to ask us to dump Tavares</div></div>

Not at all the same? Right now Toronto is at a crossroads.
If you’re all for moving Marner sure? But I think that is a SLIPPERY slope for Toronto.

I’m cheering for Leon and Draistail to win it this year. But next year I’d be rooting just as hard for the Leafs (Nylander is my favourite of their players personally).

I don’t see how trading Mitch &gt; Tavares is going to go well. Tavares has gotten worse consistently- but he’s so good to start with hed still be a good player at 5-7m aav (I’d say 6). But at 11 he’s wasting cap and I don’t see him getting better next year. Additionally, trading Mitch means Toronto has no leverage to any team for the following reasons:

1. Mass Media Circus
- other GMs see it and so does Mitch. Mitch and the other teams hold all the cards. Mitch has to accept the trade. He also has “deflated value” due to the circus, scapegoating, and also by his standard play - a poor playoffs.

2. Expiring UFA
3. Expensive new deal
4. Last but not least important- the ROI
- the combination of these things means you have teams dripping to undercut TML on a Marner trade because they will have a healthy clip to have reasons to not offer a boatload for Mitch. And not many teams can afford Mitch. And Mitch gets a say in all of this. Meaning it’s going to be a huge gamble trading Mitch seeing all these align and getting a return that isn’t going to worry some analysts.

It would be bias for my say trade JT to SJS for:




That would be bias. Here I’m offering Toronto a high value pick in return for shedding 11m in salary (technically 5m if we’re going say he’s 5m overpaid). He’s technically being dumped for a 2nds value here.

That’s not the same as trading JT for Zetterlund (which is an incredibly one sided traded as Toronto would likely take that in a second to shed cap and gain top6 potential winger who would be an amazing depth add for their RW behind Nylander and Marner). Zetterlund is 24, not 28. Again I could see other trades being bias. I see this as nearly on par with moving an 11m contract.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>odyssey</b></div><div>toronto isnt trading him period. it makes no sense to trade him. nor does he want to be traded</div></div>

I believe there is more sense in trading JT then there is in Marner.
Forum: Armchair-GM4 juin à 15 h 36
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>themostleaf33</b></div><div>Lol stop Leafs aren't going to pay to dump a 30 goal 60 point forward and their captain on the final year of his deal.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ggha777</b></div><div>Tavares doesn’t waive</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>odyssey</b></div><div>leafs and tavares decline</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Waffelz</b></div><div>Leafs definitely say no, Islanders probably also say no. Vancouver maybe yes. I don't really see the point of putting Smith and Celebrini in the AHL if you're going to have guys like Guschin and Graf up in the NHL. Couture is by all accounts unlikely to play next year.</div></div>

Who would take JT at 11 other than San Jose? They’re basically the only team - and he’s noticeably gotten slower / “worse” (I’m not calling him a bad player). He’d probably get less points next year and even less on SJS. Toronto needs a change and imo : moving Marner creates a massive hole that is going to be hard to fill / find a perfectly equal trade.

Marleau at 6m cost 1first+
Here Toronto is just trading down roughly 30 picks. I also don’t think they would move on from Topi but he’d be the next guy if you take out the first and SJS 2nd.

Additionally Tavares considered Toronto, San Jose, and NYI.
The probably of him waiving is not 50%, but it’s not 0%.

I know Cooch is likely done but I’m listing where he starts as he likely plays a couple games before hopefully calling it quits to preserve his life off the ice and his health.

I also don’t see how the NYI can start changing their team identity slightly/ pick up the pace if they don’t move money out.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Jco5ta5</b></div><div>I'm not sure I agree. Celebrini, Smith, Graf, Gushchin, Eklund, Mukhamadullin can all be in NHL and get their reps. I'm not sure what more Celebrini and Smith need to prove at college level and not sure AHL would be of any benefit. It's crazy to think about that even with those guys I mentioned, they still have Bystedt, Musty, Haltunnen, Edstrom, and Lund still developing. Plus the 14OA from this year.

I don't think Seattle is moving on from their pick. The difference between 8th and 14th in this particular draft is stark and they need to draft a top flight D which they can get with the 8th pick but not the 14th.</div></div>

Oh yeah I’m just exploring the thought process. You can view my previous posts and they’re mostly in my my middle 6 / top PP units. I’m just looking at the other perspective.

Flip that coin tho: Jiricek (only dropped due to injuries) was once a top 10 mock, and he’s also a RD and plays a great game. He’s easily at 14 if they want a D, then they also get 33rd which has great value and position (basically first and allows a BPA for 1st round falls or picking “your guy”). I see value in both teams (SJS and SEA wanting 14 and 33, plus SJS can add a small swing asset to confirm).
Forum: Armchair-GM4 juin à 8 h 36
Forum: Armchair-GM30 mai à 16 h 42
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DFinn91</b></div><div>I don’t think Addison should be back either. I think the Sharks let him walk, so I’m not sure why you went immediately to him.

Rutta and Burroughs represent 1/3 of the d core of one of the worst teams of the cap era. Saying they should be kept at all costs is ridiculous.

As to who plays instead of them. Ideally good right shot NHL defensemen signed in free agency (Roy, Demelo, Pesce, Walker)or acquired via trade. Worst case they just give those minutes to see what they have in Thompson and Emberson.</div></div>

Yes but that doesn’t change anything - and leads back to some of my comment.

Ferraro - Myers (I doubt we can afford most of those UFAs as they’d all probably rather go to a contender or be overpaid)(but sure a UFA as 1RD I agree with).

Thrun - Emberson (again I agree with you, Emberson has earned a job and a 2 year contract imo.)

Shakir - Rutta / Burroughs / UFA
- so who’s our 3RD? I don’t think Addison is a good fit for Shakir.
- I don’t think Thompson should just get the job
- I also think we need a tough, capable, 3rd RD we need to add size and grit/hard work to our 3rd pair to help the rookies out.

I don’t see how Rutta doesn’t fit that bill.

The Sharks openly tanked last year. Just cause your name was on that team means little to me. I still see value in Rutta and Burroughs. I still see value in Kunin as a 4th liner. I still see value in Blackwood.

I mean I don’t see any downside to keeping those two for the locker room, depth, leadership, mentorship, and 3rd pair roles to give to Shakir. Rutta and Burroughs would both just be the stay at home guys to let Shakir being himself.
Forum: Armchair-GM30 mai à 16 h 26
Forum: Armchair-GM30 mai à 16 h 2
Forum: Armchair-GM30 mai à 16 h 2
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NotElliotteF</b></div><div>There's no chance Toronto would move Liljegren for either pick, let alone both players for 42. Sandin fetched a mid 20s first in a deeper draft and Liljegren is just as good while also being RHD.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NotElliotteF</b></div><div>A team that had 1 single 20 goal scorer doesn't need a 22 year old who paced for 20 goals while playing 11 min a night?
I get disagreeing with the price- though there's only a 29% chance a 33rd overall pick paces to be in place Robertson is now according to historical data by age 22- but they could definitely use some bets on younger guys who might be able to score playing with Celebrini and Smith.</div></div>

NRob history of injuries hasn’t left - the best scenario for him to succeed is in TOR.

Additionally his most common linemates last year were (in no order) : Domi, Nylander, Tavares, Knies, Jarnkrok.

It’s not like he’s a bad player but he hasn’t flourished in Toronto when given the same opportunities like Knies. Furthermore, and more importantly imo - San Jose has already invested over a 2nd in Bords and Gushchin. Both of which haven’t done anything to warrant giving up on them (unlike some Sharks fans jump to the conclusion of).

Bords and Gushchin are already behind Eklund who’s locked for the foreseeable future as the Sharks 1LW. Which means they’re battling for their careers soon. One for 2W, maybe one swaps to RW and they can both earn a 2W. Or they’re battling for who’s 2LW and who’s going to have round out their game and be 3LW and prove everyone wrong.

Imo, that’s the forgotten aspect of the Sharks this year. Is their prospects need to start fighting for jobs and NRob adds unnecessary complications because trading 42 is such poor asset management imo when you have Bords and Gush. I don’t see NRob having a high ceiling than either so it’s like saying we have 2 jobs up for grabs and 2 prime candidates weve invested in. But let’s spend even more on adding a 3rd Small Winger.

Last year the Sharks just tanked. They kept their hopes and dreams (good prospects) away from the NHL and in the AHL (but the Cuda also sucked so unlucky).
But they gave icetime to Hoffman, Carpenter, etc.

This year the Sharks - atleast how I see it; can’t afford to give icetime to pointless bums. They have to breed internal competition between their prospects for jobs now, and adding NRob means one of them is the 4LW on the SAN JOSE SHARKS. That’s not setup for success. That’s setup for an uphill battle. Atleast being in the middle 6 gives them a fair shake.

Finally, San Jose still needs to add veteran mentors and experience to fill out a few roster spots. So there’s simply no room to spend a high value asset like 42 on - gambles; that’s what those 2 are.

It’s just unnecessary imo. It’s gotten little to do with NRob and more to do with the context of the situation - which needs to be considered when trading with another team.