SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Emil_Ismo

Member Since
Aug. 30, 2023
Favourite Team
San Jose Sharks
2nd Favourite Team
Buffalo Sabres
Forum Posts
93
Posts per Day
0.3
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 3 at 5:28 p.m.
Thread: Nightmare scenario - dropping to third
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Burnout</b></div><div>I think you're overestimating how much Montreal would want to move from 6th to 3rd. Especially considering how the tiers of prospects is shaping up.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>nativewulf</b></div><div>Gonna be honest here. This draft is pretty deep up to about 13, and outside of Celebrini and Levshunov all of the guys behind them could go in any order depending on how each team views them.

What I'm getting at is you're not getting that package to move down from 3OA to 6OA. Maybe a team further down would give up serious capital, but I'm talking about moving from outside the top 10 to get to 3. Other than something like that happening, you're not returning 3 extra assets to move up 3 spots.</div></div>

Moving into the top-3 of any draft would be expensive. I actually based this on 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 and instead included a 2nd rounder.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 1 at 2:52 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 28 at 2:42 p.m.
Thread: Best case realistic deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>sharksdoee</b></div><div>I think MG will want a 2nd to take on RJ, or at least add a 4/5 to the 3rd.
Duke is kind of the same scenario above in terms of value, especially with retention.
I think that's a decent enough Campbell trade. Petrov doesn't add much so if it's a 1st + 3rd to dump I think MG would want XB or Broberg back as well. Also, would EDM be more interested in AB than LK? If they split up Drai and McD I would love to see AB playmaking Drai.
Overall I'd probably take these as they generally help the future.</div></div>

I don't think Colorado will want to dump Ryjo for a 2nd if they're not getting anything in return. It's not like he's a bum, he's just not worth 4 million.

I could see Duclair going for a second as well if there's a bidding war for him come to deadline. But in a vacuum I don't see a team paying more than a third. I also wanted to keep it as grounded and "pessimistic" as possible.
Forum: Armchair-GMDec. 17, 2023 at 12:00 p.m.
Thread: Leonard to sharks
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>RecycleShark</b></div><div>I see your point, but I think this would still be worth it for the Sharks. Leonard looks like a sure bet to be top 6 forward. He has the toughness the Sharks need. He has chemistry with Smith, and was a steal at #7 overall. I read that the Sharks were even considering taking him over Smith with the #4 pick. Leonard is a safer bet to have an impact than any future pick higher than #10 overall. This seems like an overpay for him, but even at this price some Caps fans decline.</div></div>

I strongly disagree.

Like I said, Leonard looks good, but there's no reason to suspect someone of similar potential will not be available in the top-5 this year. Not to mention the fact the Sharks will have good lottery odds so it's possible that the pick is at #1 or #2. Plus we're giving up another first in the 10-12 range AND a high second? Lets say the Sharks pick at #4 and the Penguins end up at #12.

You're willing to trade Helenius/Levshunov, Zayne Parekh, and someone like Liam Greentree for Leonard straight up? And remember, that first pick could be at #1.
Forum: Armchair-GMNov. 28, 2023 at 5:18 p.m.
Thread: Perry
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BeterChiarelli</b></div><div>I'm not looking at this as separate trades though: Edmonton has their own Ferraro in Kulak, his inclusion in the deal, and Janmark's, aren't relevant. I asked you how the combination of the two prospects, next year's first, and Campbell fails to fetch Blackwood. You've ignored that question.

The underlying expectation of any team acquiring Campbell is that he's going to be bought out in the offseason, because (as you've correctly identified), he's not playing at an NHL level. I'd argue he's even sub-AHL at the moment. His buyout costs $10.5M. Blackwood is owed another year at $2.5M in real cash dollars. If you want to get nitty-gritty about the money involved, Jackie is roughly owed another $2.85M in the AHL this season, and Blackwood is owed about $1.74M. The Sharks aren't looking at acquiring a $15M tab if they acquire Campbell: that figure is only about $9.1M spread over six years.

Even if the idea of "a first and a third" is less than your expectation, either Bourgault or Broberg hold more inherent value than said pick. The Leafs got absolutely hosed when they had to turf Marleau's $6.5M for what was expected to be a late first-round pick: extrapolating on that math suggests that a first and a B+ prospect is good value for eating Campbell's buyout (it's less than 1.5x the Marleau buyout and is way less impactful to the Sharks than that buyout was to the Hurricanes). Is Blackwood worth a prospect equivalent to Broberg or Bourgault? Probably not, but the Oilers aren't in a position to bargain. I suspect any excess value in that math makes up for whatever you feel is lacking in the first and prospect tag in acquiring Campbell.

EDIT: that math on what the Sharks would owe Campbell takes into consideration how much of Blackwood they aren't on the hook for AND the discrepancy in their remaining cap hits for this year: it's a net +$9.1M, not $9.1M owed.</div></div>

Real cash is not a concern for the Sharks, that's not where the cost of Campbell stems from and we both know it. As said by the other commentator, the market cost of Campbell seems to be three good assets. Broberg fills that criteria, the 2025 first fills that critera, but I don't think Bourgault does as I said earlier. So that's two a-grade assets and one b-grade, without taking into account the fact that the Sharks are shipping Blackwood back. We're not talking about a massive discrepancy in value in here, but there definitely is one