oldnews
Members-
Posts
53,830 -
Joined
-
Days Won
186
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by oldnews
-
Toronto will be interesting without Anderson. He's been putting lip stick on that backend for some time. And that one bad goal that Campbell gave up (after standing on his head for them) - will be the signature of his Leafs playoffs performance needs and the pressure he'll continue to be under there, as that teams depth continues to wither and wilt (due to Dubas' shiny forward build). When you're built like the Fleas, you can't afford lapses in the playoffs - something they have multiples of every single time they've been under pressure attempting to close anything out. They've folded, repeatedly, period. I really like Campbell - he's extremely likeable - but I sure as hell would not envy the position he's gonna be in there. Go ahead and back out of the Holtby discussion Toronto. There must be a 40+ yr old league minimum goaltender that grew up drinking from Leafs baby cups that's willing to come there to help you win a cup.
-
I guess we disagree on the value of Gadjovich. For me he was a 2nd round pick that has sustained his draft value / odds of being an NHL asset - and a player of the 'type' and position that this team needs in it's pipeline. Ceci is not an AHL prospect equivalency - so I don't see the point of discussion like this when we don't look realistically at these 'equivalencies' ie likewise when you equate a Gadjovich throw-in to a 5th round pick. If you're going to do that, we may as well make equivalencies of the 'lesser' options in free agency to the mid tier that we're hoping to look at. And further, it looks like there's a good chance that the mid-tier - or at least what we formerly considered mid-tier (ie Savard) could now be considered a 'big fish' in free agency (perhaps it's reasonable that his value upticked in context, and after having been snapped up by a contender in a Cup run). If that is in fact the case - then pass on Savard regardless - because getting frenzied in order to be 'aggressive' is not my idea of a prudent offseason. The Savard that the Columbus Blue Jackets were selling - I'd be interested in. The Savard post-Cup that a handful of teams are likely to take a run at - no thanks. It's akin to what Seattle paid for Oleksiak - a player I liked - before I saw what they paid for him. Seattle may have strategically set the market high for a number of reasons (both cap to spend and assets to sell) - it's possible the market does not play out as they hope/anticipate (certainly the one thing that didn't necessarily pan out for Vegas was the attempt to stockpile and resell, and surprisingly post-e.d. virtually no one ponied up. In any event - are there really any targets that can be had at reasonable market value that make it worth dumping an RFA 2nd round pick for? That is highly debatable, considering the amount of interest there appears to be in the assets hitting the market - and what teams have been willing to do to get out ahead of that market (Larsson, Oleksiak, Martinez, etc) - which tightens the UFA market even more. I'm not particularly inclined to 'get aggressive' in order to get into that market. Yes - the team has made improvements this offseason - but this coming season is not the priority imo. I'm happy they're poised to be more competitive, but there's a limit in assets that I'm willing to spend short term to do so. We already got more than I'd anticipated out of the 9OA and a 2nd - but going more in - in order to get into a shrinking buyer's market - is not my idea of a great plan in this short term. Be more patient around Holtby and Schmidt - we don't really need to move either of them - and doing so in - a subtraction, in order to make an addition, doesn't necessarily get us much, if any, further ahead imo. Is the team better with a particular mid range UFA than they are with Schmidt? I'd like to hear the analysis around that before wasting assets to move cap.
-
I think they'd have to sign their last 4 or 5 depth players in the million range if they don't make those moves. I'm fine with that. I don't expect deals in excess of 7 millon bridges for our young RFAs and not in excess of that for the pair of Garland and Dickinson. Remembering that they can go up to 10% over the cap (they won't need to go over 5% imo) - and then LTIR Ferland's 3.5 million for opening night - I think they'd be fine. They have guys like Podkolzin, Lockwood, Gadjovich, etc already signed. They have Woo, Bowey, etc (Brisebois RFA) - some viable/serviceable AHL depth already at or near NHL ready. These guys are all sub 1 million cap hits. The options imo are to create more cap in order to continue to 'get aggressive' - or simply go to the market for a few reasonable options (if they can't get a Savard, Hakanpaa, etc) there are still the Ceci etc (rhd) types, the Smith etc (lhd) types - bring back a Fantenburg - whatever - for me it's borderline 6 of one, a half dozen of the other.
-
"Throwing in" a Gadjovich is - (or equating him to a mere 5th round pick) - makes absolutely no sense to me - nor would I value moving Holtby anywhere near that highly. buying out Holtby and offsetting 1.9 million of cap into two seasons from now is also a bad idea imo. That is when this team's young core starts getting closer to approaching their primes... My approach going into this summer would have been to prioritize that season - and let the contracts we had - LE, Roussel, Beagle, Holtby (Sutter) - expire in the meantime. I'm ok with what they did - because of the sheer value that Benning got in the process of dealing that 9thOA pick. I would have focused on dealing that pick for the right RHD - and if that didn't pan out - keep it, and possibly trade down. But getting Garland in that deal - and OEL - and moving 12 million of cap - and getting 7.2 retention - I'm ok with the 'aggressiveness' and a bit less patience than I wanted them to exercise. The price the Coyotes were expecting last summer - with no leverage and a list of two - was unrealistic imo. This time around they were evidently prepared to 'get real' - and if anything, I was surprised that we got additions like Roussel thrown into that deal.... The one year of Holtby remaining is very easy to palate in that context - this team already accomplished a massive haul that took care of a whole range of issues in one fell swoop - and did so at what I'd consider well below market value to move that much cap in the present climate. Which makes me even less likely to cave to anyone expecting us to turn around and overpay to move an asset that a lot of teams actually need in the present. Just keep Holtby if teams aren't prepared to meet our terms. We have no lack of leverage here - we don't really need to move him. If it means not getting into what looks like a typical free agent frenzy over RHD - so be it - it's not looking like the best opportunity to be a buyer of free agents in any event. Target the more reasonable placeholders if need be - and continue to look for that future partner for Hughes (which doesn't need to be completed by opening night).
-
Not when you have a rookie starter. And not for a number of teams who are losing goaltenders to FA or the e.d.... We have a solid use for Holtby if he's not moved. He can be bought out for a 500k and 1.9m cap hit - an option I do not advocate. It's really simple imo - if a team doesn't want to take him on as is - move on to your next option - we will keep him.
-
[Trade] SJ trades Christian Jaros to NJ for Nick Merkley
oldnews replied to qwijibo's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
I'd probably take Jaros over Merkley at this point. Good toolbox if he manages to bloom late. -
[Signing] Bruins re-sign Taylor Hall
oldnews replied to MattJVD's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
A 'beast' eh? Meh. If you'd said that about his end to the regular season I might not dispute it, but.... He had 5 pts in the playoffs - 3 even strength points, in 11 games - had the usual tilted ice to / he plays on - was a -2, the usual weak defensive metrics - a player that is notoriously about as vacant/inconsistent as they come off the puck. You can take Taylor Hall out of Deadmonton, but I'm not sure you can take the Deadmonton out of Taylor Hall. -
[Proposal] Schmidt and Holtby to Philly
oldnews replied to Provost's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
I'm not particularly interested in dealing Schmidt myself. He's perfectly capable of playing the right side - and swapping him for a comparable RHD is wishful imo - I'm open to proposals but haven't necessarily seen any good/viable ones. The team probably needs another RHD - unless it turns out that OEL and Hughes work well as a pairing - easy to speculate, hard to say until you see them in action - but if that does turn out to be the case, most of this talk is to fix something that otherwise would not be broken. Personally, I'd be more inclined to retain the D that we have at this point and go out and add the best possible option/s in free agency. Ideally they add a veteran LHD as well - particularly if OEL or Hughes and Schmidt rounded out the right side with Myers - Edler back would be solid imo because otherwise the team has 3 young LHD...(and most people want to see at least a pair of them make the lineup) but I have no problem with the rumours of McCabe or Smith - there are others that could probably fit in a depth role - and at least a handful of RHD UFAs that could help or at least provide serviceable depth. With 3 young LHD, the team probably needs to go at least 8 deep... I don't see the urgency to deal Schmidt - and I also don't necessarily take the sourcing/stories all that seriously. Schmidt was alright under terrible conditions last season - there probably aren't that many options that improve the team over what he brings. If he's not 'happy' here - be a professional and show up for your millions/contract - I imagine if that were the case the team would do what they can to find something that makes sense, and/or would revisit it if/when it does make sense (as the Yotes had to do with OEL). -
[Proposal] Schmidt and Holtby to Philly
oldnews replied to Provost's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
this deal gives us a legitimate future 3C candidate, and a solid and affordable depth RHD - while leaving a relatively healthy chunk of cap savings that can be utilized in free agency or another deal. you don't have to accomplish all your goals in one transaction. But the deal doesn't really make sense for Philly imo. -
I like them both. I don't expect either of them to win a Norris - but at the same time, they're both undisputably top 4 defensemen - and they're both relatively versatile. The reality for this team - is that it had a large gap - between the Edler generation - and the next. Yeah - we have some good young prospects/good young roster defensemen - Hughes, Juolevi, possibly Rathbone and Woo - but there was and is no way around filling out the rest of our blueline with acquired/signed assets. Both these guys came with term - signing UFAs - if you want top 4 D - requires term.... Anyhow - I'm fine with the prices the team paid in both these instances - I think the quality of both these players considerably outweighs the asset costs - and in every single circumstance, every team takes a risk when there is term involved - it's unavoidable. Teams take comparable risks giving term to young players - arguably an equivalent risk, because while there's a decline risk with older players, there's an 'unproven'/smaller sample one-off risk with young players that get paid, often prematurely. I'm ok with the risk we took on OEL - because we did not pay market value for a proven top 4 defenseman imo. What the Coyotes were rumoured to want last summer for him - needed to be walked away from imo. This time around the negotiation obviously went/ended differently....
-
You couldn't possibly have missed - or intentionally sidestepped the point - more thoroughly. Find me a quote somewhere - anywhere - to the effect that Loui Eriksson was the worst contract in the NHL in the three years prior to Benning signing him... The post you responded to refers to the bad takes that pretend / misrepresent OEL's past three seasons. The 'er look at LE' thing - is irrelevent. If you have a counterpoint - or some argument to qualify how 'bad' he's been the past three years, have at it. But save the meaningless analogy - because it's just as easy to point out that Edler had some of the worst season's of his career heading up to the dreaded age of 30, followed by 3 of the better consecutive seasons of his career at 30+ - easily worth the 6 million cap hit he was earning. Neither of these tell us a thing about what will transpire with OEL. He could decline - or he could re-uptick here. Garland could sign a deal for 3.5 or 4 million for that matter - and then never have a 5 goal season again. It happens to mid 20s players as well as 30 year olds - people simply have a more general tendency to sandbag anyone approaching the dreaded 30. There are countless exceptions to all these 'rules'. Part of the real world business of being a GM is necessarily taking a lot of risks - and some of them don't turn out. But to obsess over the LE experience and project it upon any/every subsequent player - isn't 'logic'. Folks here don't seem to realize that there are more than one form of risk. One risk is doing something like this - counting on a player to sustain and not decline rapidly - while another risk is doing nothing, because you were once bitten, and now you're overcompensating with shyness as a result. Some of the better moves GMs make are also the ones they don't make. No one has a crystal ball - all they have are the player evaluations to the present. All of that other talk (ie here's my negative sample - but, but, here's my positive example!) is mere distraction though - philosophy - which has little to do with player evaluation in the end. What has OEL been the past three seasons? (One of) The worst contract in the NHL? Seriously, anyone making that claim needs to get real.
-
[Proposal] Schmidt and Holtby to Philly
oldnews replied to Provost's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
how so? -
[Proposal] Schmidt and Holtby to Philly
oldnews replied to Provost's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
I mean - I'd probably take this deal from our viewpoint - we get a solid, affordable depth RHD and a very good young/prime defensive/two-way center that would fit well here imo - but I'd be very surprised if Philly entertained this.... -
[Proposal] Schmidt and Holtby to Philly
oldnews replied to Provost's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Philly still needs help on their blueline? They have: 1) Provorov returning - who played 25 minutes a night for them. #1 penalty killer, 2nd unit powerplay. 2) Sanheim returning - who was their '#2' - just under 22 minutes (and #3 penalty killer) 3) Ryan Ellis - Nashville's '#2' - at 23:46 / night - their #2 powerplay D and #3 penalty killer 4) Ristolainen - Buffalo's '#1' minute muncher at 22+ minutes a night (and a principal #2 penalty killer). 5) Braun returning - another principal penalty killer (2:27/game) - who played 18:32/night.... 110 minutes/game with those 5 - and loaded with special teams options /all situations. They need help? They're already over $20 million of cap on their blueline - with Sanheim to re-sign....Nate Schmidt would push them up to $24 million + on that blueline with Sanheim still to be accounted for. And they have 14thOA19 Cam York wanting in.... All they really 'need' is an affordable depth D or two - at most a LH comparable to Braun (a 1.8 million cap hit). -
they may need a guy to play behind Pelech - but I doubt they move any of Pulock, Mayfield or Dobson having made it through the expansion draft.... that might be my favorite right side since the Jets had Byf, Myers and Trouba... I sure as hell wouldn't be looking to change it. But yeah - I'd sure as hell have been looking to poach Mayfield (have been for years, so it's 'oldnews' at this point).