Essentially the cap doesnt matter for the next two years so the increased incentive for Carolina to do this trade doesnt cost anything to the hawks but Wirtz money.
Not tragic, but losing a 2nd and a 1st, essentially paying a cap hit of almost 10m the first two years, then 7.5m the next 5 years... for a guy who likely gives you around 40-50 points a season... is lunacy.
He's probably more of a 50-60pt player, especially if he gets top PP time, but he's not good defensively, isn't physical, and can't play C. Not what the Hawks need, at all.
Why are people saying 40-50 points per year I dont get this? In his last 4 seasons hes averaging .71ppg. Thats like 57 points per 82. If you count his last 2 years its .77ppg and 64ppg.
The hawks dont need a 25 year old 6'2" right wing that can fly,drive play, take offensive pressure off of Bedard, play in the top 6 and possibly put up 30 goals and 70 points?
Its more of a why dont we want nice players obsession?
No, it's more of a "why are we paying so much for a nice player?" thing.
He has played a total of 5 full NHL seasons. You don't just take away seasons to skew the numbers to fit your narrative.
So when you say he scored 41 points and dont mention it was in 53 games you are not trying to fit a narrative?He has played a total of 5 full NHL seasons. You don't just take away seasons to skew the numbers to fit your narrative.
His first 3 years he put up 36, 41, 40 points. He had one anomaly season where he put up 71 in 82, then came back down to earth with 53(much closer to his norm). He's likely going to give you 40-55 points in any given season, and as was said, he's not good defensively, doesn't play physical despite his size, and isn't really cut out for C.
And it IS essentially paying almost 10m for his first two years, because you're paying 9.75m in cap space for his first two seasons, and losing a 1st and 2nd round pick to acquire him. The pieces of the deal you proposed can't just be looked at as individual things, they have to be looked at as a whole.
And "possibly put up 30 goals and 70 points"??
He has 16, 14, 14, and 24 goals in 4 of his 5 seasons. The one anomaly season he had 28. Paying for assumed production is never a good thing. You pay for what he's regularly capable of, and that is basically 50 point seasons, give or take a handful of points in either direction. He averages like 50.5 points per season over his career so far. With scoring the way it is in the NHL, I don't think it makes sense to pay that much money, plus draft capital, for a guy who is putting up 50 points per season.
You can sign guys with similar upside in free agency, and not have to worry about losing draft capital. And not only draft capital, but the draft capital that actually has a shot at becoming good NHL players, like your first and second round picks do. You act as if a late first is some kind of nobody pick down in the 4th round.
No you cannot. Not for prime years for on the 2nd to worst place team in the league.He has played a total of 5 full NHL seasons. You don't just take away seasons to skew the numbers to fit your narrative.
His first 3 years he put up 36, 41, 40 points. He had one anomaly season where he put up 71 in 82, then came back down to earth with 53(much closer to his norm). He's likely going to give you 40-55 points in any given season, and as was said, he's not good defensively, doesn't play physical despite his size, and isn't really cut out for C.
And it IS essentially paying almost 10m for his first two years, because you're paying 9.75m in cap space for his first two seasons, and losing a 1st and 2nd round pick to acquire him. The pieces of the deal you proposed can't just be looked at as individual things, they have to be looked at as a whole.
And "possibly put up 30 goals and 70 points"??
He has 16, 14, 14, and 24 goals in 4 of his 5 seasons. The one anomaly season he had 28. Paying for assumed production is never a good thing. You pay for what he's regularly capable of, and that is basically 50 point seasons, give or take a handful of points in either direction. He averages like 50.5 points per season over his career so far. With scoring the way it is in the NHL, I don't think it makes sense to pay that much money, plus draft capital, for a guy who is putting up 50 points per season.
You can sign guys with similar upside in free agency, and not have to worry about losing draft capital. And not only draft capital, but the draft capital that actually has a shot at becoming good NHL players, like your first and second round picks do. You act as if a late first is some kind of nobody pick down in the 4th round.
No, I'm not trying to fit a narrative. I didn't leave seasons out just so it doesn't bring down his ppg numbers like you did. And we all know that's why you didn't include the season where he was around .5 ppg. The season you're speaking to was a season where Carolina was literally the 2nd best team in the entire NHL, standings-wise, and was top 5 in scoring, I believe.
Because he a 20 year old rookie playing 14 minutes a night and it doesnt make sense to include that. The rest he was around 17-18 minutes.
I'll ask again.
He has put up 28 goals and 71 points in 82 games and 41 in 53 before. Hes going to enter his prime, would play on Bedards wing, and play the 1st power play. Why are we acting like he cant put that up again?
41 points in 53 games.....
Its literal cap dollars that dont effect anything to do with the team. Its extra leverage to get a trade done.
I see you can't answer the questions, huh?
Size is irrelevant because he doesn't use it.
Plus pay him what amounts to 9.75m for two years, and then 7.5m per season for another 5 after that.
I'm not a Necas guy but worrying about cap and late firsts and 2nds is a waste of time.
