Proposal: Nyr-ana
- Thread starter HallStar
- Start date
Zajacs Bowl Cut
Lets Go Baby
nah
they really need slivf. He signed a contract for under 4 mill, is young , a 20 goal scorer, and has great chemistry with kesler. They need another winger no doubt, but they aren't going to subtract 1 to do it.
they really need slivf. He signed a contract for under 4 mill, is young , a 20 goal scorer, and has great chemistry with kesler. They need another winger no doubt, but they aren't going to subtract 1 to do it.
HallStar
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2016
- 48
- 41
As is IF there is nothing other than take it or leave it, I think both sides do it very hesitantly for the reservations expressed below, but consider this is not worth walking away from. FORTUNATELY IT IS NOT TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT, and I continue to see a core of what I called, Vats and Zuc, I think we should start there and look at other lesser pieces to further both teams wants/needs.
Fast is a solid bottom middle RW, can do off wing in a pinch based on his smarts, but is a better fit on Rangers.
McIlrath is needed on Rangers, both as clear the crease guy and enforcer. And very important, I'm tired of the mismanagement of players by AV, who is arguably doing McIlrath wrong and would thus love to run him out of town. No. Just NO. AV has to learn to bend buckle and break here and if not his sorry butt can go out the door.
As and for a revision, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD
core of Zuc -Vats, yes
then something like Ws Kovacs [good in camp next or following season here] and Tambellini [ready to help this year, deserves cup of coffee now] both who are min $ and draft exempt.
going to Rangers, we take 1-2 cap dumps [no NMCs] so we take on around a mil of cap, and then to balance that plus the above prospects, if the dumps are real dumps and not also prospects, then 2 2nds, maybe a 2nd and 3rd if there is any value in the dumps for two picks who could go slightly higher now given they are good bets to actually make it and not fail.
Zuc plays either W.
You max value Silf, which I do not begrudge you, but you under value NY's players
Agreed
Instead of one who is more expensive, take 2 who are each good bets to make it and get here soon - 1 now 1 perhaps next year
then do something else as add to Rangers to balance
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
Not interested McIlrath we don't want any more defenseman even if we trade 1 away. Also have no interest in trading Silfverberg away.
He can reach 60 points in that he has done it once and came close another time but I wouldn't be relying on him actually doing it a lot. He ain't a 70 point player.
I did see that teams are running scenarios via friedman's column that silfverberg may be left unprotected in the expansion draft.
dracom
Registered User
Which makes no sense. Ducks protect 7 forwards and 3 defensmen. Getz,Perry,Kes, Cogs, Silf, Rakell, someone else and protect Lindholm,Fowler/Manson,Vats. How any of them think we end up leaving Silf unprotected is beyond me. Unless they believe we would go 8 players, in which case they are still dumb.
Spazkat
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2015
- 4,362
- 2,277
It's hardly overvaluing. Silfverberg gets 40ish a year and he does that while taking the toughest match-ups on the Kesler line. Who takes that spot now? Fast? I don't think so.
And why do all Ranger fans keep wanting to give us McIlrath (or any D for that matter). I think Ducks fans have been pretty clear and unanimous with the "do not want" directive
Doriva
Registered User
I dont think its necessarily that we specifically want to give you McIlrath, I think its more a case that AV has made it painfully clear that he doesn't want McIlrath (no comment on whether thats a correct or incorrect decision.
Combined with the fact that our overwhelming need is a young RHD, it's essentially trying to kill two birds with one stone.
