Flyerfan52
-
Posts
13,040 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
138
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Everything posted by Flyerfan52
-
We can pursue players on teams no longer playing. I'm a bit surprised to see that neither the Flyers nor Flames have traded for the rights to Grubauer, Raanta, etc. yet (Jets can't as it means exposing Hellebuyck). After the draft it means dealing with Vegas. Just a thought but I wonder if @ least 1 team isn't willing to expose their ready for prime time b/u knowing they'll lose him because it means they don't lose a skater. As long as they value that skater more than the 2nd/3rd pick they'd recieve it would be the way to go. The teams with the most to lose (Wild & Ducks) can't do that but Nashville could sacrifice Mazanek knowing they have Saros in the pipe & even @ 8-1 protect all their D but unlikely to lose a forward.
-
True but I'm kind of saving that spot for a starter to back up Grubauer.
-
True 'nough. I've heard they were trying to unload Varlamov. I'm not ready to take that risk on Varlamov.
-
Wondering what the Avs (or LV) would want for Pickard. I forgot during the Worlds he's b/u to Varlamov.
-
What he said was he wanted an insurance policy rather than a career backup with the unproven 1 we hope is our future Kipper. If Grubauer, Raanta does shoulder the load thats great. Like me he's hedging his bet by having the other goalie capable of more than relief.
-
Schenn was drafted as a center but was converted. The fact Stajan & Backlund are both centers means little as I doubt both are still Flames next year, Regardless Schenn is 25 & has a 5.125 x 3 contract, plays all 3 forward positions & could fill that need @ 1st line RW.@ worst he's a top 6 to replace Backlund. It might also force Bennett into assuming that #2 C role like we've been expecting. The clock is ticking on that. I made the deal 2 for 2 because I honestly don't see any 1 part we have that Hex would accept straight across for Manning. I could do that easy from the Jets storehouse of forwards but I went with what I saw as less costly for the Flames. The Flames add toughness in both zones @ the cost of 2 pending UFAs while saving a few $s. That does sound unfair so let's have the Flames add a conditional draft pick if Backlund doesn't re-sign. Carolina will likely expose & lose Murphy in the LV draft. No matter as the 1 I want is Hanifin. I'm still game to lose Gio's contract to the draft instead of waiting like we did with Iggy. If not we expose Murphy. Part of it is without Brouwer we have 1 more space to protect a forward because Brouwer's trade value alone makes him 1 we should protect. Since the Canes have room to protect him I see this as before the draft or they might as well trade whichever D(s) are left for a better offer. (Hanifin is a LD so I imagine the Jets trying to land him after the draft. Some of those young forwards that are surplus in Wpg. would be more attractive to Carolina than Brouwer IMO but the Jets can't add D until after the 22nd.) Like I said in the goalies thread I see some deals as time sensitive.
-
You spend the assets now while Gruber, Raanta, Mrazek, etc. is available for fairly small assets as the other team prefers something over the nothing they get if LV picks him. After the draft the chances of landing our young, developed behind a starter that won't be unseated go down or get more costly. The teams likely losing 1 can't ask much as there are few teams bidding due to most having a goalie they want to protect. If LV lands 4 of them they'll keep the best 2 or 3 so we don't land the cream but because others will bid just to improve their backup LV has a seller's market. If say a Grubauer isn't picked by LV the Caps have no reason to trade him for less than a top end return. Or if they make 1 available the team like the Caps that lost 1 will bid because even the next goalie in most systems is a few years away & unproven. Even if the 1 BT decides on isn't ready this year odds are he will be next year. That's why we hedge the bet with a former stater. There will be vets that are former starters available as UFA to cushion the transition or be the starter if the 1 BT opts for isn't quite ready. Given that few teams can even offer them the chance they will be the starter prices should be low. For instance if Bernier want's 4 x 3 but Mason (a starter most years) 3.5 x 2 you tell Bernier that you'll give him a bit under what Mason asked but if he wants to take his chances we wish him good luck. We tried 2 career backups last year. That was less than awe inspiring. To me an apt pupil stuck behind a top 5 paired with a guy used to being a starter sounds the better bet.
-
Still looks good to me. ********************************************************** Side note to phoenix, Mason will be UFA (@ least until after the LV draft) but you are right about Reimer.
-
I don't mind any of the suggestions made. The names are pretty much what we've mentioned in this thread though & with the alternate pairings mentioned some parallel what some of us have said. He didn't mention Mason though. A decent article. I'm still big on Grubauer & would like him paired with 1 of Mason, Bernier, Elliott or even Reimer.
-
Didn't run him although a year later after an on ice comment McDavid (& his cheerleader Don Cherry) reversed his comments of a year ago about hitting a rut. Manning & Gudas actually double teamed McDavid on that hit. That said, I think Manning is someone we could & should add. 18+ minutes but only 12 points. He's 26 which is prime time for a D but the mold is cast so don't expect him to ever become a gunner. 0.975 x 1 then UFA (but should be easy to re-sign fairly cheap. Flyers likely protect him but would trade him after the ED to make room for yet another young D. The need there is forwards. Now that Hex has a bit of cap space I see a package deal of Manning & Schenn for Backlund & Stajan (if unclaimed) as possible. (BTW, Capfriendly shows Schenn as C/LW but he seems more @ home @ RW when he was played there.) ************************************************************************************************** I was reading off season game plan about Carolina @ TSN. Hanifin seems available & Murphy out of favor. I'd like to scoop both as Hanifin (20 & on last year of ELC) fills our top 4 need while Murphy (24, 1 year @ 0.878 then RFA) could be a cheap reclaimation project. There also the need is forwards. Since they have cap space maybe we can interest them in Brouwer.
-
If we trade Backlund I wouldn't take Niemi off their hands unless they also took Brouwer. That means they fill out their forwards @ a cost of 3.75, shed Niiemi but lose that 3rd OA. That leaves Dallas 12 to fill out their D so doable. If they insist I'd take Eakin off their hands to fill a role here as he's much better than last years stats (although I wish he had more of his dad's meanness).
-
With Del Zotto I was thinking more of the 4th D but the signing cost depends on his other offers. I've seen what he can do but last season wasn't 1 or his better 1s. If we get him @ 3 we've got a bargain because I see him as top 4 but @ 3 he fits what I see as reasonable for a #5 to slide into top 4 if/when needed. We do have 17.7 wrapped up in 4 D (Bart @ 0.6, Gio @ 1st D price of 6.75, Hamilton @ 5.75 which is also 1st pair wages & Brodie earning his 4.65) so we're limited in how much we can add. Many won't like this but Gio's NTC includes 19 teams he can be traded to. Some obviously won't need/want him but if BT can find 1 trade partner that lessens the load so we can add say a $4 million top 3 & the same $s @ #4 for a total of 19 but a better overall D. My ideal under a 73 million cap is 8 for goalie, 20-25 for a dang good D (Nashville spends 20 but they have 3 top 4s @ bargain price) & the remainder on forwards. But, I see the beauty of prevented goals as @ least = to goals scored. Few do!
-
Postma is UFA so costs only a contract. But believe me you won't want him. If going for a Jets D as a 4/5 I'd put in an offer to them (or LV) for Chiarot's RFA rights. He just keeps getting better, A late bloomer. As UFA I'd go for Del Zotto last of the Flyers. Trades for a #3/4 I've mentioned in a few threads. ************************************************************************** The likelihood of the 3rd pairing getting the starts in the o-zone are slim unless we have a huge lead. That is where you try to make hay with your best players on the ice. So to answer that ? your bottom pairing needs to be more defensive than offensive in the few minutes of ice they see.
-
I'm hoping we add a 4th D better than Stone & then re-sign Stone as a 4/5 type for if/when needed. Should we get a 4/5 he'll probably be partnered with Bart or a prospect (with Bart @ 28 I think what we see is what we get) for the low minutes to rest the top 4. The 4/5 might get as high as 15 minutes but his partner maybe 10. Main use comes when the other team has their 4th line on the ice. Most coaches plat the heck out of their top 4 (more so than the top 6 forwards) & I don't think GG is any different. 3rd pairing will remain a spot for an extra probably partnered with a trainee. In games where 7 D are dressed that spot is usually used on a "Sideshow Bob" on a precautionary dressing if a higher D has just returned from illness/injury.
-
All true. There is also the fact that most Euro kids dream of Olympic Gold while NA kids are about the SC. So playing closer to home, staying in your culture, being able to pull on your country's jersey trump playing NHL for all but the most competitive (though many of those made the trek to play junior in NA for the hockey & to aclimatise to the culture). But since there is no guarantee they make it the much lower $s of the AHL side of an ELC is a deterant. There is still the odd gem to be found so if a vet Euro player still has the itch to prove he can play in the best league in the world I'm willing to give him that chance if it's low risk/low cost on the chance he is an NHLer. What is likely to cause an influx of those however is the report the KHL is going to contract by 6 teams. I see undrafted college players as just as likely to be that raw gem & there isn't the cultural baggage. Same with the undrafted late bloomers in juniors. The biggest bidding wars seem to be on the NAs meeting that description or the collegians that spurn their drafting team to go UFA (remember we feared Gaudreau would do that?).
-
Nope. For finally figuring out that a decade of sucking was useless until they landed 1 worth being taken 1st.
-
I don't know why you quoted me twice & said basically the same thing. Yes. I could be disappointed in his game translating to the NHL but I could be disappointed in any prospect transitioning from the AHL, junior or a Euro team. I'll reiterate that I'm willing to take a chance on a cheapish 2 way contract. As far as the Oilers I don't care about who they endorse. They've done that in a range from McDavid to Yakupov by selecting them 1st OA.
-
Not really. I don't see players from the Euro leagues enough to form a real opinion as the international events are a different style of play than the NHL. But I'm willing to take a chance given I'm not really impressed by our D prospects. A cheapish 2 way contract I'll gamble on for a grown player to see if his games translates from a Euro league.
-
In that case just have 5 fprwards on the ice every shift. 30+ years. This is no longer the "run & gun" 80s.
-
Nope. Deal 1: To Flames: Niemi 3rd OA To Dallas: Calgary 1st round pick (probably #16 OA) 4.5 million in cap space Deal 2: To Calgary: Grubauer (or a different current b/u) To other team: McCollum A meh prospect or a 2nd or 3rd in 2018
-
I don't want Lehtonen nor Niemi & am not 1 that wants to give up on Brouwer yet. With Dallas I'm thinking more about Nill stating that he's willing to move pick #3 OA. I'd be willing to take Niemi off their hands & expose him rather than McCollum for flipping 1st rounders & we add a neh prospect. It's a weaker draft but that gives us 1st pick of the rest after the Debbies & Flyers take the 2 main centers. Saves Dallas the buyout & dead space $s. If LV doesn't take him we have an expensive b/u for a year. Then we use McCollum as part of the deal to land a current b/u from a team that doesn't have anyone else to expose (Caps, Rags.) or even the Pengies if BT wants MAF. Heck, we could even use that 3rd OA as an offer for Schneider if NJ wants to fast track their rebuild.
-
I'm still liking what I saw against Canada yesterday. 50 freaking shots against & only 2 goals allowed. Those weren't 50 low % shots either!
-
What do we give Vegas to take pending UFA Johnson instead of a player? & LV can't trade a player selected back to the team he was selected from.
-
I guess it depends on the offer. We have no goalie to protect so we could trade Stajan for him so the Caps can expose him. The Caps could also re-sign Orlov & expose 36 year old Orpik with his 5.5 x 2 contract since they could use a bit of cap room to reload (that'd go a long way to keeping Shattenkirk &/or Oshie). It's early & there are so many variables it's hard to say who will be exposed let alone taken. I just hope BT makes a reasonable offer to try to solve our goalie shortage.
-
So Wideman & Engelland are exempt? What stops the Caps from extending Copley on a 2 way minimum contract to meet exposure to garner a return rather than lose Grubauer for nothing.
