SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

exo2769

exo2769
Member Since
Jul. 28, 2015
Favourite Team
Chicago Blackhawks
Forum Posts
15853
Posts per Day
4.9
Forum: Armchair-GMMon. at 1:35 p.m.
Thread: Curious Marner for 2OA straight up
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CantStopWontStop</b></div><div>I think from Torontos perspective, it’s kind of a sellers market.

Arizona has gone the last decade gobbling up the leagues waste, but it’s sensical to believe the rumors that they will add to the team in Utah. They actually have to: they won’t have the contracts to sign the picks they have and will make. They literally have to offload picks.

Additionally, this is the first time in a very long time contending teams have cap space. All these teams have been slammed to the cap for 5 years. The flexibility will not be used by all, but it gives more buying power to contenders than they have had in a long time.

So there’s gonna be buyers. Who is for sale? Would you rather Marner or Zegras? Marner or Necas?

In My Opinion:

As a sellers market, Marner is the best available asset. By a lot. There are obviously complexities given his NMC and the understanding that he’s going to sign 8 years if he goes somewhere, and all that goes into that choice and stuff, but that doesn’t discount that he’s the single best asset you could get if you were buying. I’m assuming Marner would be okay with a core of him and Bedard. The second best choice motivates the price: Toronto can leverage their ownership of the best available asset - the drop off to the second best - to get a fair value despite the unbalanced situation.

Toronto wouldn’t be rebuilding. See: Lafreniere. They’d go to market with cap space, secure a guy like domi for term, strengthen defense, etc. Could even trade their existing first or draft it and trade it at the deadline aka Vegas. They’d use the pick because it’s timed nicely for contribution with Matthews, Nylander, Domi, Knies down the road. They’re good enough to contend with that asset developing 2-4 years. Gives them a second wave of sorts.

The Rangers have shown the way.

Really the cleanliness of the ordeal is what is attractive to me. 95%+ of existing plans can stay. There isn’t a whole lot to regret for either side here. The cap space is valuable enough to offset a busted draft pick, and Chicago has nobody else to give money to, gets somebody with a lot of good hockey left, better than any other choice on the market, who doesn’t have some hidden clause like “surprise I’m always injured”. Players like Marner are only traded if there’s baggage. The baggage in this case is that Toronto has too many guys at the same age that are good and also forwards, and marners term being last made him the odd one out. The cleanliness adds value.</div></div>

I guess I simply don't see things the way you do. Your viewpoints (from an outsider's perspective) are bias and rosy towards TOR. I'm not a TOR fan, but did and will still cheer for them to win a cup if the Blackhawks can't win. I root for the underdog most of the time and it's been way too long for TOR fans. I feel for them because my Cubs took over 100 years to win a world series. It would be good for hockey if the Leafs won one.

It's not a sellers market when the asset you're trying to trade away has a full NMC. Just look at Patrick Kane. He got a whopping 2nd round pick and the Hawks needed to find double retention. I do agree (somewhat) with your assessment on Utah. I think they would like to make a splash, BUT they <strong>most definitely don't have to literally offload picks</strong>. Doesn't mean Utah isn't a good fit...I think it is a good fit...probably the best fit to be fair, but they can just draft guys and not sign them yet to contracts. They don't have most of their 2023 1st round picks under contract yet and Shimashev/But aren't even available for another year either.

You're also missing a lot on the "who is for sale?". What about all the UFAs out there? From the Blackhawks perspective specifically...Patrick Kane seems like a much better option on a short term deal than Mitch Marner. We get elite talent and don't have to give up any assets. He still has his home here. Hawks fans mostly agree that this would be a better route than trading for Marner.

Either way, good conversation! Cheers!
Forum: Armchair-GMMon. at 11:53 a.m.
Thread: Curious Marner for 2OA straight up
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CantStopWontStop</b></div><div>Well, I think this would be a rapid acceleration of their rebuild as opposed to slowing due to Marners age and expected contribution over term. They’d still have futures to maintain a healthy base, but they’d be expecting 8 great years out of marner.

Bedard is the rare 18 year old who’s nhl ready. Likely consideration that the 2OA will be 2-4 years out if D, 1-2 if forward. A delayed contribution similar to Kakko and bedard is waiting 4 years for an impact.

I don’t think Chicago should keep bedard in an extreme losing environment for 2-3 years. I think they should try to get him into a solid competitive environment asap, with as little damage to building around him as possible. This is a solid choice because of marners productivity with another elite shooter, clean injury history. Sending just 1 asset away means whatever plan can mostly stay in place.</div></div>

But why does it HAVE to be Marner? It doesn't. He's a fine option, but there are plenty of options out there. AND since when is TOR rebuilding? You're saying 2-4 years out. Since when is TOR cool with waiting 2-4 years to be Cup Contenders. It really just doesn't make any sense for either CHI or Marner. I 100% understand why TOR wants to do it. They're making out like bandits! Makes no sense at all from the CHI point of view.
Forum: Armchair-GMSun. at 3:57 p.m.
Thread: Realistic Marner Destinations - Analysis
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ryminister_92</b></div><div>I honestly think Chicago should take Levshunov and still keep Jones. But Marner could be a possibility - I know we’ve discussed this before, and I agree it’s not a likely option, but it gives Bedard a playmaker and takes some pressure off him.

Hawks should take Levshunov as he’s their position of need most (I believe the first 2 round you take the beta player at your position needed then the rounds after that just take the best player). Chicago will likely be a top 10 pick next draft and there’s tons of offensive forwards to take them but not many right handed defenders - and a guy like Bedard should be able to elevate his line mates so they shouldn’t need a high end guy for him</div></div>

We have discussed. And I hear you. I just think at #2OA, you draft best available. Not position of need. I've watched Levshunov a bunch at MSU and the 2nd half of the season was better than the 1st half...AND I do think he'll be a solid NHLer, but at #2OA you have to be looking for game changers.