Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XIII (Nanaki edition)

haohmaru

haohmaru

boomshakalaka
Aug 26, 2009
16,997
11,586
Fleming Island, Fl
bernmeister said:
Yeah, no.

I respect your right to your opinion.
That said, my views on how they should deal long term generally work.

I said trade Buch early on when he had value b'c he still had term
I said no on wasteful rentals
etc
etc
etc

don't get em all right, no one does
but extending current window IS their best path now
and coupla big deals are needed for that

if smaller options are not better [judge each situation separately on merit]
then go big or go home
Click to expand...

Which has no relation whatsoever to the ludicrously unrealistic trades you propose that will never happen.

And almost NOBODY liked the Buch deal so that’s not one I’d hang my hat on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnSandvich, CasusBelli, FoxysExpensiveNYDigs and 2 others
TGWL

TGWL

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 28, 2011
16,041
10,726
haohmaru said:
Which has no relation whatsoever to the ludicrously unrealistic trades you propose that will never happen.

And almost NOBODY liked the Buch deal so that’s not one I’d hang my hat on.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'd argue his value was probably high when the trade took place, it just we got taken to the wood shed on the actual trade.
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,604
4,184
Da Big Apple
haohmaru said:
Which has no relation whatsoever to the ludicrously unrealistic trades you propose that will never happen.

And almost NOBODY liked the Buch deal so that’s not one I’d hang my hat on.
Click to expand...

TGWL said:
Yeah, I'd argue his value was probably high when the trade took place, it just we got taken to the wood shed on the actual trade.
Click to expand...

Mandar said:
Mic Drop......
Click to expand...

respectfully disagree
yeah Buch had increased production evident later on when we dealt him
BUT
when that happened, his term was a sliver of rfa status

obv, we could have gotten more if he had less production but still showed upside potential while being offered more cheaply for longer term = greater value

given that reality, and fact we failed to make a deal earlier b'c we self rented Buch in win now posture when it was obvious to a blind man we were not gonna be cup finalists, value was not highest when we dealt him and we were lucky to get what we did under those misfire circumstances

--------

my props are arguably doable from a value standpoint at minimum
so not "ludicrously unrealistic"
howev, this misassessment is to be expected from someone who views Vesey as > than Rempe
 
TGWL

TGWL

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 28, 2011
16,041
10,726
bernmeister said:
respectfully disagree
yeah Buch had increased production evident later on when we dealt him
BUT
when that happened, his term was a sliver of rfa status

obv, we could have gotten more if he had less production but still showed upside potential while being offered more cheaply for longer term = greater value

given that reality, and fact we failed to make a deal earlier b'c we self rented Buch in win now posture when it was obvious to a blind man we were not gonna be cup finalists, value was not highest when we dealt him and we were lucky to get what we did under those misfire circumstances

--------

my props are arguably doable from a value standpoint at minimum
so not "ludicrously unrealistic"
howev, this misassessment is to be expected from someone who views Vesey as > than Rempe
Click to expand...
You don't just trade players away because you fear value may drop when the decision comes to actually trade him. You can't get in front of every situation just to make sure highest value was gotten on every trade. We all know players can't play prime years forever. Teams can't make decisions based on that player not being worth as much a year or 2 down the line, especially teams that want to compete.
 
haohmaru

haohmaru

boomshakalaka
Aug 26, 2009
16,997
11,586
Fleming Island, Fl
bernmeister said:
my props are arguably doable from a value standpoint at minimum
so not "ludicrously unrealistic"
howev, this misassessment is to be expected from someone who views Vesey as > than Rempe
Click to expand...

Every GM in the NHL would view Vesey as a better player than Rempe right now. Every. Single. One.

Want to revisit in a few years? Fair enough. Impact to a lineup TODAY and it's not close.

As to the "ludicrously unrealistic" let's take your proposal above:

"
1. Rs - Ds
KAM, Othmann, Lindgren, Vesey, Robertson
for
Zegras, Vatrano, Vaakanainen, Dumoulin, Helleson"

In the salary cap era (2005 - present) please point out ANY 10 player swaps between two teams that have occurred.

Next, please point out where a team that was actually in the top 5-6 to actually win a Stanley cup did such a thing.

You can't. Because it's UNREALISTIC.
 
RempireStateBuilding

RempireStateBuilding

Registered User
Dec 13, 2009
3,655
1,852
NY
haohmaru said:
Every GM in the NHL would view Vesey as a better player than Rempe right now. Every. Single. One.

Want to revisit in a few years? Fair enough. Impact to a lineup TODAY and it's not close.

As to the "ludicrously unrealistic" let's take your proposal above:

"
1. Rs - Ds
KAM, Othmann, Lindgren, Vesey, Robertson
for
Zegras, Vatrano, Vaakanainen, Dumoulin, Helleson"

In the salary cap era (2005 - present) please point out ANY 10 player swaps between two teams that have occurred.

Next, please point out where a team that was actually in the top 5-6 to actually win a Stanley cup did such a thing.

You can't. Because it's UNREALISTIC.
Click to expand...
Utah and Arizona just swapped entire teams. There were like 25+ players involved. Keep up. :sarcasm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: bernmeister

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,604
4,184
Da Big Apple
haohmaru said:
Every GM in the NHL would view Vesey as a better player than Rempe right now. Every. Single. One.

Want to revisit in a few years? Fair enough. Impact to a lineup TODAY and it's not close.

As to the "ludicrously unrealistic" let's take your proposal above:

"
1. Rs - Ds
KAM, Othmann, Lindgren, Vesey, Robertson
for
Zegras, Vatrano, Vaakanainen, Dumoulin, Helleson"

In the salary cap era (2005 - present) please point out ANY 10 player swaps between two teams that have occurred.

Next, please point out where a team that was actually in the top 5-6 to actually win a Stanley cup did such a thing.

You can't. Because it's UNREALISTIC.
Click to expand...
Guess again
Your arbitrary benchmark of 10 in a given single deal attempts to define that size of (quantity) of assets in trade automatically = unrealistic

1. realistic is dominated by quality of assets on both sides, taking into account other factors [player needs to be moved, cap considerations, etc.].

2. while rare we DO see big deals once in a while
in ever tighter cap situation, 2 teams bring in a third partner
the total assets can approach 10 or even more, but that is unnecessary since, as explained above, your methodology is erroneos

3. I did not break this down further because same is unnecessary.
But to further repudiate your erroneous assignment of 10, deals can often be subdivided into smaller deals
to illustrate in the immediate example above, doing Helleson and Robertson as a separate trade reduces it to 8 total assets in a larger deal, which prob can be subdivided further another once or twice -- howev, such hair splitting is unnecessary

------------
IF YOU WANT TO CHALLENGE MY PROP, FINE
BUT DO IT ON THE MERITS
NOT YOUR ARBITRARY BS

---------
Also
I do not have time to waste with you, but just to further prove what I said above
the site Biggest trades in hockey history - NHL Trade Tracker
lists a couple that are recent that have high quantity of assets swapped, some with conditions as well
e.g.
Guentzel deal, 2 players to CAR, 6 assets to PIT - 9 total
also the Erik Karlson deal [SJ-PIT] was 7 assets, but notes MON was third team so something further there

---------
Finally the ultimate rejection of your arbitrary postulate is that in sports, while rarest of rare, in NFL one trade -- forget the name -- 1 guy traded for like 10.
And most exceptional, 2 franchise swapped entire teams, all assets for each other.

***********************
And I have already listed why you choose to ignore that instead
Rempe >> Vesey right now
he has upside JV does not
 

bernmeister

Registered User
Jun 11, 2010
28,604
4,184
Da Big Apple
to repeat what I said in post 1565 since some have missed it:

Rempe has size, reach, strength, stamina, energy, straight away speed

Vesey MAY be SLIGHTLY better east-west skating

Rempe, like Kreider before him, has to learn how to score at NHL
Not for nothing, Jimmy V never was confused for a scorer or sniper.

Rempe can for now be an effective component in a properly built line [Vesey, not so much]. You'll recall I said one formula for a successful line =
driver of play + facilitator + scorer
while he's a bit rough around the edges, obv, Rempe's physical dominance qualifies him as potential 'driver of play' in that equation

And as to checking, Vesey is ok, but ordinary at best
While Rempe has room for improvement, when he checks you, you feel it.
He's a PITA to play vs
He forces opponents to modify to avoid getting hit

Vesey.... not so much

wanna debate the above? fine
but no more arbitrary nonsense without substantiation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom
X