• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

No Excuses No Limits! The mother fucking goddamn season thread

MindzEye said:
I'll take a crack at it

- Karlsson, despite coming off of a ridiculous season is/was risky and 33. He's a boom/bust player and it was a boom/bust team looking to roll the dice in a boom/bust transaction because it's either win now or die. There weren't (m)any suitors, so you're kind of bidding against yourself.

- Ekholm as mentioned is 3.5 years older than Weegar. 1st + 4th + 3.5 years of Weegar = ????

- Lindholm was expiring (though signing an extension the day after means Boston was obviously given permission to talk to him, but still this limits the trade field to teams Lindholm was willing to sign long term with) and still netted a 1st, 2 2nds, recent 1st rounder Vaakanainen. Lindholm was also kind of considered to be a diminished version of his previous self at the time of the trade. His reputation repaired itself last year in Boston.

- Muzz was signed for 1 more year, not under control for the rest of his prime and still cost a 1st, and 2 recents 2nd round pick prospects.

A lot of this comes down to the circumstances under which the players came available. SJ finally gave up trying to get max value for Karlsson after a solid year of trying to rape the world. Nashville finally traded Ekholm to tank when he was 33. Anaheim didn't give up Lindholm until the last minute before they would lose him for nothing in free agency. LAK was mid tank and knew the time to move Muzzin for as much as possible was then.

I don't see Calgary being remotely as convinced that now is the time to move Weegar without an overpay, just like trying to trade for any of the above before their clubs were ready to move them would have required an overpay. Calgary has lots of stuff they could move to clear the decks now and aim for a quick retool (as a rebuild is unlikely to be approved by an ownership group currently building a 1.2 Billion dollar arena)
Click to expand...

meh, in every case the age is balanced out by the contract length I think.
 
Preston said:
Signed for 8 more years into his mid-30s on a team that is struggling with him as a top pair d. I don't see why the value would be much more than Ekholm's last year. When has a Knies type ever been traded for this type of player?
Click to expand...

What is a "Knies" type though?

Is he really a better prospect than say Grundstrom was at the time we traded him? Yes, I think he's better than Grundstrom, but as a 20 yr old Grundstrom put up good AHL numbers, was one of Sweden's best players at the WJHC for those who give a fuck about that tourney (while Knies disappointed), both 2nd round picks, etc.

At 20-21 they both got their first tastes of the show and put up fairly similar offensive totals (pending for Knies). I don't see the Grundstrom tunnel vision that has kept him a 4th liner, but I don't think there's a massive gulf between how they're viewed as prospects at that age.
 
MindzEye said:
What is a "Knies" type though?

Is he really a better prospect than say Grundstrom was at the time we traded him? Yes, I think he's better than Grundstrom, but as a 20 yr old Grundstrom put up good AHL numbers, was one of Sweden's best players at the WJHC for those who give a fuck about that tourney (while Knies disappointed), both 2nd round picks, etc.

At 20-21 they both got their first tastes of the show and put up fairly similar offensive totals (pending for Knies). I don't see the Grundstrom tunnel vision that has kept him a 4th liner, but I don't think there's a massive gulf between how they're viewed as prospects at that age.
Click to expand...
Current knies isn't looking so hot but he's not far off being arguably their best forward in the playoffs. The skillset is there to have a far higher ceiling than grundstrom ever had, which is why we were ok with trading him. If anything grundstrom is more on the level of Niemela than knies for me.

But maybe I've read too much into the knies propaganda and he really is just another grundstrom. Either way this is all based under the assumption that they would even trade Weegar. If they decide to rebuild his value is only gonna fall each year from here. One semi off year (which Dom is kinda showing that to be happening early this year) and his contract suddenly looks borderline unmovable in a hurry.

Not sure his reputation is all that hot being a top d on a perpetually underperforming team. Which is why most of us are interested in the first place.
 
F-SUkh5XcAAoeyL

jesus.
 
Back a bit on the trade ideas for weeger, Tanev, Zodorov combo as the main piece.

I haven't heard Jarnkrok and mcabe as something Calgary may want.

Calgary and tre wanted Jarnkrok before he might work with Lindholm for a bit. And mcabe because he's cheap. If it's weeger then I can see minten or Robertson to be added..but don't sleep on what Jarnkrok could add to engage Calgary in making the deal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top