Wally1112pac
Three Year Rebuild lol
- Jul 10, 2019
- 1,354
- 2,094
He sure doesn't
Soon to be top 6 forward making 1.2 for the next 2 years.
He sure does.
He sure doesn't
Crazy how delusional some people can beSoon to be top 6 forward making 1.2 for the next 2 years.
He sure does.
The Campbell trade for me is easily two 1st. Because the Oil are only able to deal in future 1st and likely bad ones at that. The trade for me would be Campbell + Ceci + '25 1st + Akey + Lavoie for Murphy + Soderblom + whatever RFA forward we want to lose the contract that Edmonton may want for depth (Reece Johnson or Entwistle being most obvious to move on from). Ceci for Murphy get the cheaper mediocre 2nd pairing RHD with a year less contract to offset some to fhe Campbell money for 2 years instead of one and Ceci has a MUCH better track record of actually being healthy and available to play. Akey and Lavoie are worth like 2 2nds or the equivalent of a bad 1st and fill the prospect pool holes of winger with some size and a RHD.
Pot meet kettle! Pretty ironic coming from you!!Crazy how delusional some people can be
the cost for a bad contract is probably down a bit from a few years ago with the cap going up.I'm not seeing the value here for CHI to take on that contract. We get out of Murphy's contract quicker but it doesn't matter because it's only two years regardless. So we take on Campbell's contract for a 2025 1st and a couple prospects -- one was hurt all year and the other is turning 24 during training camp.
If the Hawks are taking on 3 years of Campbell unretained, they need the 2025 1st and Dylan Holloway. As Holloway is the only young player in Edmonton's entire system that appears to have an NHL future, I can't imagine they'd be too keen on giving him up.
the cost for a bad contract is probably down a bit from a few years ago with the cap going up.
It's not just a bad contract it's a bad contract with term.the cost for a bad contract is probably down a bit from a few years ago with the cap going up.
Agreed that the market will potentially have more "facilitators" with the cap going up, which theoretically decrease the return.my point is what the market was 2 off seasons ago for dumping contracts was higher then last year and last year is higher then this year. Yes the longer of the term and the dollar amount will effect the cost. But ulitanmelety its what the market will bear and 2 1sts is not market. some other team would except his contract for less in my opinion. the hawks have the space and it will get unused and they may also want a backup goalie if Soderbloom starts out slow. I would probably do it for a 1st and another asset.
We do not need to “get out of Murphy’s contract quicker”. It’s not a benefit.I'm not seeing the value here for CHI to take on that contract. We get out of Murphy's contract quicker but it doesn't matter because it's only two years regardless. So we take on Campbell's contract for a 2025 1st and a couple prospects -- one was hurt all year and the other is turning 24 during training camp.
If the Hawks are taking on 3 years of Campbell unretained, they need the 2025 1st and Dylan Holloway. As Holloway is the only young player in Edmonton's entire system that appears to have an NHL future, I can't imagine they'd be too keen on giving him up.
We do not need to “get out of Murphy’s contract quicker”. It’s not a benefit.
Murphy is a fine 2nd pairing Dman.Murphy's bad and injury prone. I certainly see it as a benefit. But the Hawks aren't under any kind of pressure to move the contract.
Murphy is a fine 2nd pairing Dman.
I actually think there’s gonna be some teams that would trade for him this year if he could stay healthy through January 1 the hawks could retain 50% to increase his value, At 2.2 RD. With size he has value but he has to prove he can stay healthy.I bet Murphy gets traded for value in his last year. He can go be some playoff team's third pairing RHD that year.
His game is fine. Most of his tenure has been during a Bowman’s screw up and now the rebuild.Fine in what sense? Because the Hawks have been a bad defensive and transition team for his entire tenure and he's gotten a lot of icetime -- seems he's part of the problem. The guy simply doesn't make plays, can't breakout of his zone and he doesn't even get stops. His greatest attribute is his size and physicality but he's usually chasing the game with it, playing reactively. When you think of Murphy, what exactly does he do well?
I think you mean 3rdMurphy is a fine 2nd pairing Dman.
That just means the Hawks have been a bad team and Murphy isn't of a caliber to significantly elevate a team or D Core, which nobody would have claimed, not that it proves he's bad.Fine in what sense? Because the Hawks have been a bad defensive and transition team for his entire tenure and he's gotten a lot of icetime -- seems he's part of the problem.
His game is fine. Most of his tenure has been during a Bowman’s screw up and now the rebuild.
Played last season with a rookie just breaking in. … Rookie looked very good. Then Murphy got hurt and posters were wondering why the rookie didn’t play well any longer. Coincidence?
That just means the Hawks have been a bad team and Murphy isn't of a caliber to significantly elevate a team or D Core, which nobody would have claimed, not that it proves he's bad.
Because Connor Murphy? lol, I don't think soWhy are the Hawks a bad team?
A player playing over their head doesn't make them "bad", that's more a team issue. If you are stuck with Adam Lowry as your top Center, that doesn't make Adam Lowry "bad", it means the team doesn't enough talent.When you have bad players playing in over their heads.
Because Connor Murphy? lol, I don't think so
A player playing over their head doesn't make them "bad", that's more a team issue. If you are stuck with Adam Lowry as your top Center, that doesn't make Adam Lowry "bad", it means the team doesn't enough talent.