|
|
Post by Daniel - Canucks on Jan 20, 2021 16:04:33 GMT -5
To Capitals:
Jesper Bratt
Jonas Johansson
Anthony Cirelli
2021 3rd Round Entry Pick
To Canucks:
2021 1st Round Entry Pick
I accept.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Jan 20, 2021 16:27:41 GMT -5
Washington accepts
Johansson to Hershey
Release Reinhart
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 20, 2021 16:38:20 GMT -5
Washington accepts Johansson to Hershey Release Reinhart Why are you making this trade? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Jan 20, 2021 18:45:23 GMT -5
I'm not sure what the question is. I'm getting a solid prospect goaltender from a team that I also have a 1a/1b starter who is currently out of action. I'm getting a #2 Center on a powerhouse team that has continually improved on his numbers each year in the league in Cirelli. Bratt is less proven but I believe he is also poised to break out this season a bit. All for what yes will be a higher end 1st rounder but in a weak draft IMO, not sure what the problem is here?
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 20, 2021 22:03:48 GMT -5
I'm not sure what the question is. I'm getting a solid prospect goaltender from a team that I also have a 1a/1b starter who is currently out of action. I'm getting a #2 Center on a powerhouse team that has continually improved on his numbers each year in the league in Cirelli. Bratt is less proven but I believe he is also poised to break out this season a bit. All for what yes will be a higher end 1st rounder but in a weak draft IMO, not sure what the problem is here? I was just asking a simple question that required a simple answer. I don't see the need to act so dumbfounded or make it seem like it was such a silly question. Let me clarify. This is a trade that would get a real life GM fired. You are perennially a REBUILDING team. Make no mistake about, it won't just be a high pick, it will be the FIRST pick. This is your most valuable asset, hands down, every year, and you continue to trade it away. And not only trade it away, but for two players with expiring minor leaguer eligibility who more than likely would have been outright dropped and could have been picked up for free (or whoever a strong Vancouver team dropped from it's main roster to make room for these players). Not only that, but you will have to use two keeper slots on these players should you choose to keep them, and even had to drop two additional players from your roster to accommodate. So to summarize, you're essentially trading your most valuable asset, 2 roster players, and 2 keeper slots for an AHL goalie and a 3rd round entry pick. But I guess it is all just a matter of perspective. Anyway. Did that answer your question? |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Jan 20, 2021 23:03:17 GMT -5
There's a lot of speculative opinion here, no? You're thinking in terms of your own team and how valuable these roster players and slots are for you. Who did Chris actually drop to accommodate vastly superior assets? Heinen & Soshnikov? Total junk. He's improving. Your summary is inaccurate. He moved down 2 rounds and received a Center in the Top 6 on the Stanley Cup winning team, a blue chip prospect goalie who has had steady and impressive numbers up to this point in his career and he's also a big bad boy which bodes well for a goaltender and his ability to stick in the NHL, as well as a player who has had fairly impressive numbers to start a career and is expected to play top line minutes alongside Jack Hughes when he's able to get into the lineup. I'd say Bratt is prime for a potential breakout playing in that position and it being his 4th season as well, typically we see breakout candidates in this position. The trouble here is, struggling teams are handcuffed, there are only so many things you can do, you'd like to see Chris wait around for 3 or 4 seasons to potentially add a Keeper quality player to his stable with that pick, you'd like to see him make more picks, you say he's a perennially rebuilding team and maybe that's true but what he's done here is make a push to become more competitive sooner. At the very least this gives him more options and a look at how multiple situations pan out.
Teams would really be better off being able to trade for Keeper Slots, this is one of those situations that brings it to the surface, that useless empty Keeper Slot for a Bottom 6 team could be used to add extra picks, prospects and players without giving, basically, anything whatsoever up but a worthless asset like a Keeper Slot that wouldn't be used for anything significant anyway. That was truly the best way a bottom team could add quality assets to its roster and just for a single year rental. It's a unique scenario of an asset that is useless for a Bottom 6 team but becomes potentially extremely valuable to a Top 6 team, giving the Bottom 6 teams leverage in negotiating. The only hope Bottom 6 teams have is to give up their very best assets to gain depth or no deals will be made with the Top 6.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 21, 2021 0:41:24 GMT -5
There's a lot of speculative opinion here, no? You're thinking in terms of your own team and how valuable these roster players and slots are for you. Who did Chris actually drop to accommodate vastly superior assets? Heinen & Soshnikov? Total junk. He's improving. Your summary is inaccurate. He moved down 2 rounds and received a Center in the Top 6 on the Stanley Cup winning team, a blue chip prospect goalie who has had steady and impressive numbers up to this point in his career and he's also a big bad boy which bodes well for a goaltender and his ability to stick in the NHL, as well as a player who has had fairly impressive numbers to start a career and is expected to play top line minutes alongside Jack Hughes when he's able to get into the lineup. I'd say Bratt is prime for a potential breakout playing in that position and it being his 4th season as well, typically we see breakout candidates in this position. This is hyperbole, and you know it. Blue chip prospect goalie? Top 6 center? Come on. You can't honestly be defending this. If so, I will propose you a similar deal and post it for you to accept. Deal? The trouble here, is exactly what I have illustrated and nothing more. Bottom teams trading away their most valuable assets to top teams who continue to get stronger, while the bottom teams toil in mediocrity because they execute trades that don't make sense for their franchise. I don't want Chris to wait around 3 or 4 seasons. It takes 1 season to turn a team around in our league if done correctly. Winnipeg did it. I did it with Anaheim. And Minnesota/Colorado will it do it this season. It is done by strong waiver drafts, smart trades, and most importantly, not trading away your most valuable assets. You wouldn't trade away your 1st round waiver for two mediocre prospects would you? No, no you wouldn't. Because you're trying to win a championship and understand that the Waiver Draft is invaluable to that goal. Same reason why Chris - Capitals should not be trading away 1st Round entry picks for anything less than an established superstar. This move does not set him up to be competitive sooner. This move sets him back another year and ensures Daniel - Canucks the #1 pick in the entry draft, essentially for free. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Jan 21, 2021 1:05:54 GMT -5
There's a difference between where my team is at and where Chris' team is at though. For me I wouldn't be looking to make a deal like that because my team is jam packed and I don't need depth or additional options. My team would need assets superior to the ones I currently have, that's exactly what Chris did here, I believe. That first pick is very valuable, don't get me wrong, but I believe the assets he gained all have value and considerable upside. Sometimes you have to strike before pieces become more valuable and/or unattainable. You're really not going to get an established superstar for a first rounder, you hope that first rounder becomes a superstar, so why would you trade an established one for a potential one? I don't believe Chris - Capitals has the worst team either, in the last 24 hours he's improved his team considerably in my opinion. This is exactly the type of trade Bottom 6 teams should be expecting to make, you're not gonna get Steven Stamkos for Eeli Tolvanen* or Tristan Jarry for Brogan Rafferty*. Those kinds of offers will likely just get you ignored from potential future negotiations.
*Actual trade offers made to me within the last year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 21, 2021 1:15:44 GMT -5
There's a difference between where my team is at and where Chris' team is at though. For me I wouldn't be looking to make a deal like that because my team is jam packed and I don't need depth or additional options. My team would need assets superior to the ones I currently have, that's exactly what Chris did here, I believe. That first pick is very valuable, don't get me wrong, but I believe the assets he gained all have value and considerable upside. Sometimes you have to strike before pieces become more valuable and/or unattainable. You're really not going to get an established superstar for a first rounder, you hope that first rounder becomes a superstar, so why would you trade an established one for a potential one? I don't believe Chris - Capitals has the worst team either, in the last 24 hours he's improved his team considerably in my opinion. This is exactly the type of trade Bottom 6 teams should be expecting to make, you're not gonna get Steven Stamkos for Eeli Tolvanen* or Tristan Jarry for Brogan Rafferty*. Those kinds of offers will likely just get you ignored from potential future negotiations. *Actual trade offers made to me within the last year. You don't trade your 1st Rounder for a superstar straight up, you package it with other pieces to obtain a superstar or you keep the 1st Rounder. This is not a "hockey trade." It only makes sense for Daniel - Canucks. You keep making distinctions between your team and my team and Chris' team and whoever's team, but it doesn't matter. The formula for building a successful fantasy team is exactly the same regardless of if you are contending every year or you finish last. And this ain't it, chief. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Jan 21, 2021 1:23:16 GMT -5
Meh, I guess we all have our opinions.  I don't believe the formula is the same for every scenario, if that were true there would be a perfect and understood way for all managers to build their teams and all 12 would be in a dead lock, moot point, stalemate. I believe it does matter where your team is at, what it needs and how far back you are, there are multiple ways to build value in players and in a team. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 21, 2021 1:45:46 GMT -5
Meh, I guess we all have our opinions. I don't believe the formula is the same for every scenario, if that were true there would be a perfect and understood way for all managers to build their teams and all 12 would be in a dead lock, moot point, stalemate. I believe it does matter where your team is at, what it needs and how far back you are, there are multiple ways to build value in players and in a team. Things aren't perfect because of user error. Information is perfect, decision making is not. It isn't really an opinion, assuming perfect conditions are met. 1st round waiver > 3rd round waiver 100 point player > 50 point player Better/more assets > worse/less assets The formula is the same regardless of position in the standings. The 1st place team is going to better with a 1st round waiver, the 100 point player, and the better/more assets as opposed to having the 3rd round waiver, the 50 point player, and the worse/less assets, just the same as the 12th place team is going to better with the 1st round waiver, 100 point player, and better/more assets as opposed to having the 3rd round waiver, the 50 point player, and the worse/less assets. In this case, the "better" asset is the 1st round entry pick. There are DOZENS upon dozens of Bratt's and Cirelli's and Johansson's out there. Are you trading ANY of the players below for them PLUS 2 additional roster spots? Because they are the players who have been drafted Top 2 the past 5 years in our league, including the "weak" 2018 draft. No? I didn't think so. Why? Because they are top talents that can be KEPT FOR FREE FOR 2 YEARS+ upon being drafted, while the Bratt's and Cirelli's have lost farm eligibility and will (should) be annual waiver draft selections for years to come. Not ironically, the exact same place they were signed from. 2015 Connor McDavid Jack Eichel 2016 Auston Matthews Patrik Laine 2017 Nico Hischier Nolan Patrick 2018 Rasmus Dahlin Andrei Svechnikov 2019 Jack Hughes Kaapo Kakko 2020 Alexis Lafreniere Quinton Byfield |
|
|
|
Post by Mitch - Ducks on Jan 21, 2021 13:06:57 GMT -5
Nos, tolvanen was never offered to you straight up for stamkos. There was always a first round entry (top 5 at the time) with that and more of a starting point for negotiations. You’ve come after my top players with subpar deals that would never be considered if they were vise versa so I don’t know why you’re throwing that example out there when it’s not even accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Jan 21, 2021 14:45:12 GMT -5
I'm not sure what the question is. I'm getting a solid prospect goaltender from a team that I also have a 1a/1b starter who is currently out of action. I'm getting a #2 Center on a powerhouse team that has continually improved on his numbers each year in the league in Cirelli. Bratt is less proven but I believe he is also poised to break out this season a bit. All for what yes will be a higher end 1st rounder but in a weak draft IMO, not sure what the problem is here? I was just asking a simple question that required a simple answer. I don't see the need to act so dumbfounded or make it seem like it was such a silly question. Let me clarify. This is a trade that would get a real life GM fired. You are perennially a REBUILDING team. Make no mistake about, it won't just be a high pick, it will be the FIRST pick. This is your most valuable asset, hands down, every year, and you continue to trade it away. And not only trade it away, but for two players with expiring minor leaguer eligibility who more than likely would have been outright dropped and could have been picked up for free (or whoever a strong Vancouver team dropped from it's main roster to make room for these players). Not only that, but you will have to use two keeper slots on these players should you choose to keep them, and even had to drop two additional players from your roster to accommodate. So to summarize, you're essentially trading your most valuable asset, 2 roster players, and 2 keeper slots for an AHL goalie and a 3rd round entry pick. But I guess it is all just a matter of perspective. Anyway. Did that answer your question? We're not real life GMs - You think I make this trade as a real life GM? Get real man that's a stretch. I don't see my pick being 1st overall further I don't see a stud consensus top pick across the board for this year as it is anyway, wasn't it you that even has backed me before in my prospect analysis? Maybe the pick has more value that's the value I got out of it I've offered up numerous picks/players and nothing moves without people wanting to add Zadina or other top end prospects for similar players in that 50-60 pt range you're talking about. You point out that I could have had them for free "possibly" or whoever else they dropped to make room for them. 1 possibly isn't a guarantee - going back to your real life analogy do players that go on waivers never get traded? Or how about I didn't want whoever he dropped possibly I wanted these 2 players. There is a strong possibility that I don't have 10 solid keepers this year because of prospect eligibility so keeping a young Cirelli or Bratt instead of an aging Suter, Ryan, Dubnyk, or Mrazek seems like an upgrade if you ask me. I'm trading a 1st round pick in a weak draft that I'm not of the opinion I'm going to be at the top of. 0 rosters players - we don't know of the keeper slots for 2 young potential break out players a freely kept prospect goalie and a 3rd round pick And the flexibility that if one of them go off either keeping a stud that I got before someone else wanted them - Which I've done before with younger unproven players. Simply put my roster is better today than it was 2 days ago. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 21, 2021 17:51:14 GMT -5
I was just asking a simple question that required a simple answer. I don't see the need to act so dumbfounded or make it seem like it was such a silly question. Let me clarify. This is a trade that would get a real life GM fired. You are perennially a REBUILDING team. Make no mistake about, it won't just be a high pick, it will be the FIRST pick. This is your most valuable asset, hands down, every year, and you continue to trade it away. And not only trade it away, but for two players with expiring minor leaguer eligibility who more than likely would have been outright dropped and could have been picked up for free (or whoever a strong Vancouver team dropped from it's main roster to make room for these players). Not only that, but you will have to use two keeper slots on these players should you choose to keep them, and even had to drop two additional players from your roster to accommodate. So to summarize, you're essentially trading your most valuable asset, 2 roster players, and 2 keeper slots for an AHL goalie and a 3rd round entry pick. But I guess it is all just a matter of perspective. Anyway. Did that answer your question? We're not real life GMs - You think I make this trade as a real life GM? Get real man that's a stretch. I don't see my pick being 1st overall further I don't see a stud consensus top pick across the board for this year as it is anyway, wasn't it you that even has backed me before in my prospect analysis? Maybe the pick has more value that's the value I got out of it I've offered up numerous picks/players and nothing moves without people wanting to add Zadina or other top end prospects for similar players in that 50-60 pt range you're talking about. You point out that I could have had them for free "possibly" or whoever else they dropped to make room for them. 1 possibly isn't a guarantee - going back to your real life analogy do players that go on waivers never get traded? Or how about I didn't want whoever he dropped possibly I wanted these 2 players. There is a strong possibility that I don't have 10 solid keepers this year because of prospect eligibility so keeping a young Cirelli or Bratt instead of an aging Suter, Ryan, Dubnyk, or Mrazek seems like an upgrade if you ask me. I'm trading a 1st round pick in a weak draft that I'm not of the opinion I'm going to be at the top of. 0 rosters players - we don't know of the keeper slots for 2 young potential break out players a freely kept prospect goalie and a 3rd round pick And the flexibility that if one of them go off either keeping a stud that I got before someone else wanted them - Which I've done before with younger unproven players. Simply put my roster is better today than it was 2 days ago. I disagree with pretty much everything you have stated, but I hope I am wrong and this deal works out for you long-term. |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Jan 22, 2021 0:22:15 GMT -5
Nos, tolvanen was never offered to you straight up for stamkos. There was always a first round entry (top 5 at the time) with that and more of a starting point for negotiations. You’ve come after my top players with subpar deals that would never be considered if they were vise versa so I don’t know why you’re throwing that example out there when it’s not even accurate. Alright, maybe you're right and it wasn't straight up, all I remember is inquiring about Tolvanen and you selecting Stamkos as the player you wanted back for him. Regardless of what else was offered, the crux of the deal was Tolvanen for Stamkos, which is nuts. Not sure which subpar deals you're referring to, I never offer subpar deals or subpar players, I'm actually required to overpay in most deals these days to even get anybody's attention. I disagree with pretty much everything you have stated, but I hope I am wrong and this deal works out for you long-term. You could be right, Chris could be right, but you have to recognize his very thoughtful reply giving all of us a clearer picture of what he's thinking. Sound theory in my opinion, can't wait to see how it all shakes out! |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jan 22, 2021 11:45:03 GMT -5
I disagree with pretty much everything you have stated, but I hope I am wrong and this deal works out for you long-term. You could be right, Chris could be right, but you have to recognize his very thoughtful reply giving all of us a clearer picture of what he's thinking. Sound theory in my opinion, can't wait to see how it all shakes out! A thoughtful reply giving us a clearer picture of what he was thinking was all I was ever looking for from the beginning, hence my straight-forward question. Or so I thought. It was not my intention to provide my opinion or for this to become a spirited debate. |
|
|
|
Post by Colin - Avalanche on Jan 22, 2021 14:43:28 GMT -5
I think Chris - Capitals reasoning is pretty sound. There's a lot of hype around Cirelli being one of the great defensive centres that can put up points. And on TB, that could be lucrative playing with either Stamkos or Kucherov. Plus taking a chance on some potential keepers before the break out is a risk but could pay off huge. It seems balancing winning now and selling are kind of tough. It takes time (usually) for the high picks to develop and contribute consistently. We've been pretty spoiled with the McDavids, Mackinnons, Eichels, Lafrenierres (hopefully), Pettersens, of the world. There's always Yakupov, RNH, Hischier, Patrick drafts that disappoint. It may not be a move I personally would make, but I understand his reasoning and get why he would be taking a chance. Plus he could strike gold with a late entry pick that turns into an Aho, or Konecny. We really won't know for a few years. So like Nos said it takes more than a 1st round pick or bit pieces to get studs so sometimes you have to gamble on someone emerging. You're not gonna get a Makar for a Merzlikins and Vehvilainen* *Actual trade offer made to me in the last calendar week  |
|
|
|
Post by Nos - Sharks on Jan 23, 2021 6:26:42 GMT -5
You're not gonna get a Makar for a Merzlikins and Vehvilainen* *Actual trade offer made to me in the last calendar week Hmmm, this should really read 'You're not gonna get a Merzlikins & Vehvilainen for a Makar...anymore'.  Merzlikins was ranked the 4th best goaltender last year in his rookie season, 43rd best player overall. Makar was ranked the 12th best defenseman last year in his rookie season, 108th best player overall. Even if you didn't like the trade that was offered it was nevertheless a worthy offer and a sight better than Brogan Rafferty for Tristan Jarry. You just dropped Brogan Rafferty practically a day after offering him to me. I traded Mathew Barzal & Cayden Primeau for Tristan Jarry, to give you an understanding of how I value him. Sooo, yeah! |
|
|
|
Post by Colin - Avalanche on Jan 23, 2021 9:52:59 GMT -5
You're not gonna get a Makar for a Merzlikins and Vehvilainen* *Actual trade offer made to me in the last calendar week Hmmm, this should really read 'You're not gonna get a Merzlikins & Vehvilainen for a Makar...anymore'. Merzlikins was ranked the 4th best goaltender last year in his rookie season, 43rd best player overall. Makar was ranked the 12th best defenseman last year in his rookie season, 108th best player overall. Even if you didn't like the trade that was offered it was nevertheless a worthy offer and a sight better than Brogan Rafferty for Tristan Jarry. You just dropped Brogan Rafferty practically a day after offering him to me. I traded Mathew Barzal & Cayden Primeau for Tristan Jarry, to give you an understanding of how I value him. Sooo, yeah! Merzlikins is a back up currently. He has played 2 games and sporting a classy 4 GAA. 1 rookie season at 25/26 y.o. coming in because of injury and playing well doesnt make his value any higher than what he is, a back up. By your standards, someone should've got the moon in a trade with Andrew Hamburglar Hammond after his crazy run on the sens. But no one in their right mind knew that was sustainable lol. I offered you Rafferty or Fabbro tongue and cheek after you blew me away with a back up goalie and not even the best goalie prospect on Columbus (it's Tarasov not Vehvilainen) for possibly the next best offensive Dman playing with Mackinnon. And he has at least 1 more year of team control even 1 more after that if you send him down before 150 games. (not to mention I'd have to call up merzlikins and couldn't send him down or he'd be taken by waivers and he's not protection worthy at this point) You even publically said trade me Makar in the welcome to the league thread so I thought you were serious about it. And I get merzlikins and vehvilainen lol. If you don't see how that's a garbage offer (which I think you do because if players were switched no way you'd trade me Makar for those 2 players) then I can't help you It's also a pretty gutless maneuver making trade offers public as an insult to that GM saying those kind of offers get you ignored. Because I'm sure other GMs can come right back at you with bad offers you've sent! But somehow you think you've never made a bad offer?? Are you kidding me? "I never offer subpar deals or subpar players". Well you proved that to be wrong little more than a week ago lol Everyone has made an offer they thought was good but the other GM thought was bad. Or lowballed to get a bite. Thinking that you don't do the same is hilarious Also if I came back with Makar for Merz and Vehv right now... You'd take it faster than McDavid crossing the neutral zone |
|
|
|
Post by Chris - Capitals on Jan 23, 2021 10:09:22 GMT -5
You'd take it faster than McDavid crossing the neutral zone Not gonna lie this part about made me spit out my drink |
|
I don't believe the formula is the same for every scenario, if that were true there would be a perfect and understood way for all managers to build their teams and all 12 would be in a dead lock, moot point, stalemate. I believe it does matter where your team is at, what it needs and how far back you are, there are multiple ways to build value in players and in a team.
Merzlikins was ranked the 4th best goaltender last year in his rookie season, 43rd best player overall. Makar was ranked the 12th best defenseman last year in his rookie season, 108th best player overall. Even if you didn't like the trade that was offered it was nevertheless a worthy offer and a sight better than Brogan Rafferty for Tristan Jarry. You just dropped Brogan Rafferty practically a day after offering him to me. I traded Mathew Barzal & Cayden Primeau for Tristan Jarry, to give you an understanding of how I value him. Sooo, yeah! 
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.