SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

swinny

Member Since
Mar. 19, 2017
Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
2nd Favourite Team
Ottawa Senators
Forum Posts
4812
Posts per Day
1.8
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 8:50 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CD282</b></div><div>After overpaying 3rd liners and 3rd pairing defensemen, that's a bit rich. You could easily save $3M by playing Broberg (he's ready) and another ~$1M defenseman to play on the 3rd pairing.


He's not getting PP time in Edmonton, so that knocks 20 points off his total. Plus he's not getting a Malkin-level center, he's a 3rd liner on a contender so that means McLeod. So he'll score 30-ish points in Edmonton. That's less than Foegele scored, hence the comment that you haven't improved the roster. He also doesn't replace the speed and physicality Foegele brings.


Carrick and Lavoie aren't competing for the same job. Lavoie is a winger. There are lots of 4th line centers out there for cheap that would be better than Carrick. He's not good enough now, why would he be good enough next year?


Desharnais hasn't proven to be able to play top-4. They've tried him there and it hasn't worked out. Do you think he's going to be that much better at 29 than he is at 27? It's hardly logical.

I don't mind keeping Desharnais, but not at that cost or term. Same with Sherwood - he's a 29 year old bottom-6 player, no sane person offers him a 5 year contract.</div></div>

Since when would anyone not suggest Leon IS NOT an elite centre? Actually BETTER than Malkin at this stage. Kind of speechless there. I think one year of Reilly playing with a superior Drastaitl probably means he produces. To suggest he doesn't see PP2 time given the roster is almost as outlandish.


Last time I checked, Carrick can play the wing, so HE DOES compete with Lavoie.

Listen. You can say there is overpaying going on. That is fine. But if the Oilers are going to contender for a Cup, they are going to spend. That is a fact.

Your comments are noted, but again, you have failed to produce a a better solution. I can handle critique. Why I do this. But when that critique lacks any counter proposal to what may work better, I ask..... how valuable is the critique?

What is your solution? Bringing back Brown and signing Kubalik to a show-me deal? Signing a couple bottom.pairing D on the cheap that would be depth on most organizations? A pair that would play maybe 10 minutes a game and cannot play up the line up?

PS. Broberg maybe ready, he may not be. Jury is out for me. I like insurance.
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 2:31 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CD282</b></div><div>I don't see any improvements really. Zucker and Smith are old and soft, Carrick isn't a roster regular now so the fact that he's fulltime 4C shows less depth. The defense isn't changed and the goaltending is uncertain. Rodrigue certainly has more upside than Pickard but I'm not sure he's ready for the position just yet.

Giving $10M to a 3rd pairing guy (and paying your 3rd pair $5.25M AAV) is not how you build depth in a cap world.</div></div>

The Oilers simply lack assets and cap space to do much of anything. Would I like to add youth to this group? Absolutely. But that costs either picks or money - neither which the Oilers have.

I am going to disagree on Zucker being "soft". No, he isn't a heavy hitter, but he does have some jam to his game. Older yes. But again, limited cap space to work with.

Reilly...... you tell me where you find a 50 point winger at $1.25 million. Call him what you will. The guy manages to produce.

Carrick..... for the money, I bring him back 100%. Because I am not that sold on Lavoie.

Bottom pairing...... I think you missed how this works long term. Desharnais fit in Edmonton. No reason to let him walk for a cheap plug. He replaces Ceci in a year, which..... frees up cap space.

Comments I get.

The lack of solutions however make the feedback moot.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 28 at 1:55 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DanielSan92</b></div><div>Realistically, Berggren and Johansson either have to be here or will be on another team. They're not making it through waivers.

I don't think goaltending is the greater issue here. Ned was good before he got here. He's good after he left here. Husso was good before he got here.

The defense is a ****ing abomination. Ed should help. Getting an NHL caliber RHD behind Seider would help even more.</div></div>

🤔🤔🤔

Both Ned and Husso were good for one year before Detroit. Now, Ned as a Pen was quite solid.

Not saying your point about the RD isn't wrong, but short of going after Montour, not sure what is there does anything..... and Montour is gonna be $$$ witha term I don't see aging well.

Rock and a hard place situation.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 28 at 1:50 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 28 at 1:47 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>theleano1</b></div><div>Yeah there's no Value here for Vancouver at all, Garland has been abouslety fantastic this year for us and has driven our "3rd" line all year to be one of the best 3rd lines in the leauge, he's pretty untouchable right unless a perfect offer came along, this Is certainly not that package I have doubts that Holl would even beat out Juulsen on our blue line, the value here is completely out to lunch. Vancouver certainly isn't looking to move him and Garlands never asked out</div></div>

As I said in the trade, the whole thing depends on if anyone wants the marriage to end. It certainly seemed that way.

As for Juulsen, maybe he is a late bloomer, but I am.not sold on him. I think Holl is solid. Not worth the contract (as I said), but neither is Garland.

The point is, if Garland and the Canucks have made up, there is zero reason to entertain anything.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 28 at 1:35 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 28 at 1:31 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>DanielSan92</b></div><div>"One season doesn't define what Holl is."

Ummm, he was **** in Toronto and people were scratching their heads as soon as the contract was announced. This is not "Good player had a bad season".

He's not good. He's getting bought out this season. Likely by Detroit, unless they can find somebody willing to take him without having to throw any compensation their way.</div></div>

Disagree. I am not about to claim Holl was a world beater as a Leaf, but was solid. The media was particularly hard on him..... and was playing more minutes than he should have been which did affect is game.

Playing within his means he is solid. Not great, but solid. Not worth the contract for sure. But in this scenario, neither is Garland frankly. Garland is simply easier to flip with retention than burning cap space on a buyout.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 24 at 7:47 p.m.
Thread: Retool
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>KingofRnR</b></div><div>Will have to retain in Markstrom to get that return (IF we can even get close to that for him anymore)

Definitely a HARD NO to the TOR Trade</div></div>

I am a Leafs fan, and that is a abolutely terrible for Calgary.

1. Andersson's contract for what he does is phenomenal. Perhaps one of the best contracts in the NHL right now.

2. Magniapane at $2.9 million would be a steal imo. He is the kind of mucky player the Leafs do need, but....

3. And two picks?🤣

4. if you go waaaaay back in my profile you will find my arguments why Marner never was, never has been or never will be worth $11 million. He is great sure. Not $11 million worth of it.

If I were Conroy, I would find it hard to justify moving Andersson for Marner straight up....... just because of the contracts.

Most fans valuation of Marner is absurd. This is just another case.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 21 at 6:08 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Viqsi</b></div><div>I suspect there's a good chance Nylander is kept around for at least a year to see if he truly has found his game; it's not sensible to throw away found money, after all. And I'm not particularly fond of attempting to rely on Forbort, but that's just me - I think the better approach with the blueline is to trade Provorov and pick up a defensively oriented second-pairing LD (say a Dillon or DeMelo or similar).

Otherwise more or less decent.</div></div>

I was very much on the fence with Provorov. Further, if he plays like he did last year, he might be worth more at the deadline than now.

Moving Provorov is certainly an option..... but being only 26, opted to give him some runway here to see what he can do and if he can fit.

As for Forbort..... really a one year stop gap. I really don't think Mateychuk is going to take long to hut the line up. If it isn't Forbort (which is fine), the idea is a vet stay-at-home guy on a one year deal.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 21 at 2:08 p.m.
Thread: 24-25
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>fil97</b></div><div>no from pit. not retaining on smith.

he only has 1y left we should use all of the cap we have.</div></div>

That is exactly the point..... Smith has ine year left.

The team missed the playoffs. And outside of Smith, locked into a number of contracts long term.

I can appreciate the thought of "win with Sid", but going after UFA's to fill that roster out with more money and term will only cause more long term pain.

In terms of the deal, the Pens have almost nothing in terms of younger or even NHL worthy prospects outside of St. Invary; and even there is he a player that moves the needle?

Moving a 31 year-old expiring contract for a 24 year old RD, for the Pens..... just makes sense to me.

We can agree to diagree here. When it comes to the Pens, there is no grey area. it is either move to get younger or push to win. Not sure there is a middle ground there.