Toggle sidebar

Proposal: ANA/NJ Blockbuster (Schneider)

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Vipers31 said:
Variance is for statisticians, not for scouts. As a goalie, I have faith in Gibson's qualities and how that projects going forward. You're certainly right that it's still a work in progress (one that made it to the all star game) and the jury is definitely out whether he'll make it to Schneider's heights, but there is a definite chance of him getting there, there's many years of him being an incredibly cap-friendly asset and when you add Vatanen on top, it's just not close to being worth it for the Ducks at this point.
Click to expand...

If you choose to ignore the inherent variance in goalie projection, then you're just being ignorant.
 
Feed Me A Stray Cat said:
If you choose to ignore the inherent variance in goalie projection, then you're just being ignorant.
Click to expand...

Apart from questions to how "inherent" it really is at its core, I don't ignore it, but I assign a value on it that isn't based on abstract numbers, but on individual scouting. Which is what organizations tend to do. A general hint at goalies being tough to project isn't doing much and isn't really in a position to claim being beyond "ignorance".
 
Feed Me A Stray Cat said:
No ****, he won't play 82 games. The previous poster asserted that Cammalleri was set in stone for half a season, which is just as wrong.

Looking back 4-5 years, Cammalleri is a 65 game per season guy. Granted, you'd want someone at 75+, but if he's playing like a top 10-20 forward for those 65 games, that's tremendous value. Especially if he's around for playoff time.
Click to expand...

Looking at the last 4 years, there are 2 years in the 60's and 2 years in the 40's. To me that looks more like a 50 game guy than a 65 game guy but I'm bad at math so...
 
If for some reason NJ had to trade Schneider, Gibson and Vatanen would be a hell of a return. But the problem is, the Devils have no reason to trade Schneider, and I don't think it would make sense for the Ducks to trade for a goalie (albeit top 3) when they already have a 23 year old ASG.

Pretty poor proposal all around. Devils wouldn't trade Schneider, Ducks wouldn't trade for a goalie.

And on top of that Devils have no business in trading Cammalleri. He has his problems, but the Devils have no known scoring beyond their top 5 of Hall, Henrique, Palmieri, Zajac and Camm. He has more value to the Devils than most teams.

If you think about it though (and I have thought about this due to a potential Lundqvist trade) all but 4 teams in the league ATM have a a locked in starter currently in place that is capable of backing their team to a Cup.

Those teams are Dallas, Vancouver, Carolina and Winnipeg. And the latter two have two of the top goaltending prospects in the pipeline in Nedjo and Hellebuyck. While Vancouver also has a good young goalie in Markstrom and a top 10 ish goalie prospect in Demko. And either way Vancouver has no business trading for a goalie like Schneider at the moment due to where they are as a franchise.

So really, any goalie proposals on this board should be Goalie X to Dallas.
 
Last edited:
Spazkat said:
Looking at the last 4 years, there are 2 years in the 60's and 2 years in the 40's. To me that looks more like a 50 game guy than a 65 game guy but I'm bad at math so...
Click to expand...

You're forgetting that 12-13 was a lockout year.

12-13: 44 / 48 (91.7%)
13-14: 63 / 82 (76.8%)
14-15: 68 / 82 (82.9%)
15-16: 42 / 82 (51.2%)

Avg: 217 / 294 (73.8%)

Certainly not a beacon of health, but the notion that he's locked in to miss half a season is ridiculous. He's set for 61 games based on that average, and if we look further back into his career we find he's typically around 65-67.
 
Goose of Reason said:
Since last season, when he played in the All-Star game.
Click to expand...

Well good for him. Kinda surprising since he didn't even play the majority of his teams games. Wonder if he's the first goalie to ever do that. I didnt watch the all star game because of John Scott playing in it. Thought it was a joke, not that the all star game isn't to begin with.
 
dracom said:
We don't want a guy who won't play a full season for us for 2 young core pieces. Don't need to get offended when we don't want something from your team when it doesn't fit our needs.
Click to expand...

I like how you are convienently leaving out the best piece of the trade :laugh:
 
Kurt Cobain said:
Well good for him. Kinda surprising since he didn't even play the majority of his teams games. Wonder if he's the first goalie to ever do that. I didnt watch the all star game because of John Scott playing in it. Thought it was a joke, not that the all star game isn't to begin with.
Click to expand...

That's a shame. You missed out on one hell of an event.
 
JT Kreider said:
That's a shame. You missed out on one hell of an event.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know what happened and saw the highlights. Just thought it was disrespectful for guys that are really all stars. It just didn't sit well with me, the whole situation.
 
Zajacs Bowl Cut said:
I like how you are convienently leaving out the best piece of the trade :laugh:
Click to expand...

well you mentioned "old garbage" so I figured you were mostly talking about Camm. Since he's the player that keeps getting brought up as a LW to us for our younger players.

For what it's worth, I like Schnieder a bunch, and I would say he's a top 3 goalie in the league. I just wouldn't give up a Vats+Gibson for him and a player who is getting paid a lot and won't play a full season.
 
With the Ducks being a budget team, is anybody surprised that they don't want anything to do with Cammalleri? He's a negative to their team at this point. They upgrade in net, but then have to replace a dman just to get rid of Stoner? Seems pointless.

This doesn't help NJD either.
 
JackFr said:
I have no real stake in either of these teams, just thought this one up as interesting. Anaheim has a cup window and adds a top-3 goalie at the expense of an expendable defenceman, as well as adding an excellent LW (their biggest need). New Jersey has Schneider but by the time they get good he's going to be in his mid 30s. Gibson has plenty more time, even if he never reaches Schneider's level, and they get a creative offensive defenceman. To make the salaries work, New Jersey takes on Clayton Stoner and retain $500,000 of Cammalleri's contract.

:ducks2
Cory Schneider
Mike Cammalleri [500K retained)

:devils
John Gibson
Sami Vatanen
Clayton Stoner

Just a fun idea. Who needs to add? Does this even make any sense at all?
Click to expand...

Brutal for ANA.
 
dracom said:
well you mentioned "old garbage" so I figured you were mostly talking about Camm. Since he's the player that keeps getting brought up as a LW to us for our younger players.

For what it's worth, I like Schnieder a bunch, and I would say he's a top 3 goalie in the league. I just wouldn't give up a Vats+Gibson for him and a player who is getting paid a lot and won't play a full season.
Click to expand...

Camnalleri at 50% retained would be a valuable asset
 
snoopy44 said:
How is it not?

Injuries or not a near 1ppg player when healthy at 2.5m is a valuable asset.

Sorry but 'nope' doesnt discredit fact
Click to expand...

For the same reason everyone on this board is so down and out on Nash. They just don't fit the typical mold of the HF darlings.
 
snoopy44 said:
How is it not?

Injuries or not a near 1ppg player when healthy at 2.5m is a valuable asset.

Sorry but 'nope' doesnt discredit fact
Click to expand...

Because we don't know if could play a full season next year. Especially when he's coming to a conference that's much physically tougher. When considering him coming to the Ducks, who is going to be coached by the rough RC, I don't think Camm will be able to stay healthy at all here. No reason for us to give up young players for someone like Camm.
 
snoopy44 said:
How is it not?

Injuries or not a near 1ppg player when healthy at 2.5m is a valuable asset.

Sorry but 'nope' doesnt discredit fact
Click to expand...

Why do people keep saying that? A ppg when he plays is NOT the same thing as a ppg for the team. Realistically, hes more like .5ppg for the season in actual realized points (not hypothetical "if he wasn't sitting in the pressbox" points).


And that's not counting the $ for the guy you have to carry around for the year and pay to actually be on the ice when Cammy is injured again.
 
snoopy44 said:
How is it not?

Injuries or not a near 1ppg player when healthy at 2.5m is a valuable asset.

Sorry but 'nope' doesnt discredit fact
Click to expand...

The problem with injury prone older players is that "hope" is the operative word with them. You hope they will be on the ice and effective come April.

That asset still has value, but not the kind of value you spend your best trade chips on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom