Trades and Free Agency - 2022 Off-season
- Thread starter BertCorbeau
- Start date
-
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
- Status
Fogelhund
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2007
- 24,381
- 29,523
They probably read your post, and came up with that idea here....
Some media guy throwing out pure clickbait speculation doesn't make it any more likely. The stated argument it's based on isn't even true anyway. A shorter term would be more expensive than an 8 year deal, so I'm not sure why they'd think it would be done to "keep cap down".
kb
Registered User
- Aug 28, 2009
- 15,357
- 22,020
Wow. That media guy is about as smart as a bag of doorknobs. So is anyone who believes it.
ULF_55
Moderator
Most main stream are legit, but much of the time they really don't know something that hasn't happened.
Speculation is speculation not fact.
Fogelhund
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2007
- 24,381
- 29,523
Anything is fair game as far as I'm concerned. I think most people here are adult enough to judge for themselves the source, and the likely quality of that info. More info is always better than less, and provides some discussion....
kb
Registered User
- Aug 28, 2009
- 15,357
- 22,020
This is exactly it.
The moment the writer said that a shorter UFA contract during prime years would somehow be cheaper is the moment you realize the writer has absolutely no clue as to how UFA contracts work.
ULF_55
Moderator
In my opinion, the biggest issue is that posters will quote something as fact when it is speculation. Then that gets picked up as fact and before you know it many are spouting off on stuff that has no valid source.
And this stuff lives on and on without any foundation in fact. Social media disease.
As Yogi Berra once famously said... "Predictions are hard... especially when they're about things in the future."
Robertson still not signed, what about a trade involving Nylander plus Kerfoot for Robertson? Sign him to 8.25x 8 like his other comparables this off season.
Put his brother on a line with him and JT
Bunting Matthews Marner
Robertson Tavares Robertson
Engvall Kampf Jarnkrok
ZAR Gaudette NAK
Put his brother on a line with him and JT
Bunting Matthews Marner
Robertson Tavares Robertson
Engvall Kampf Jarnkrok
ZAR Gaudette NAK
justashadowof
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2020
- 4,025
- 4,230
SeaOfBlue
The Passion That Unites Us All
- Aug 1, 2013
- 35,591
- 16,777
Just because another team decided to take a huge risk on a struggling player does not mean we should have. Just like we shouldn't have paid for Foligno just because two other teams were willing to pay a stupid price for him.
Lundkvist is worth a late 2nd on prestige alone, but nothing more. Even at that price, he doesn't make much sense when we have too many good defensemen on both sides right now, we don't need offensive defensemen now or in the future (especially with a guy like Niemela in the pipeline), and Lundkvist needing more time in the AHL. Obviously Dallas really likes something they see and they better hope he turns into Klingberg 2.0 as they probably hope he does.
justashadowof
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2020
- 4,025
- 4,230
Have you considered that Jim Nill and his pro scouts might be better at evaluating hockey talent?
Tufted Titmouse
13 Cups.
- Apr 5, 2022
- 6,222
- 8,322
I mean..that's a dream scenario, but Jason is a goal scorer and it would be real tough to pry a 40g/ppg 23 year old away from the Stars. His value is not far off from Tkachuk imo. Nylander may be the base, but I would expect Dallas would want some significant adds.
Watched a lot of Jason in the O and he is just a dynamo. I always thought his skating was mechanically wonky and might eventually hold him back but it hasn't.
SeaOfBlue
The Passion That Unites Us All
- Aug 1, 2013
- 35,591
- 16,777
Have you considered that they may also be worse?
EDIT: And regardless, it doesn't explain why they would pay well above market value for a guy like him. At best, this move doesn't totally blow up in their faces but they still paid a lot more than he was worth. Worst case, they overpaid and didn't even get a good player out of it.
justashadowof
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2020
- 4,025
- 4,230
I thought market value was what a player fetches on the trade market. Therefore the market value appears to have been a protected 1st plus 4th upgradeable to a 3rd.
Fogelhund
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2007
- 24,381
- 29,523
Personally, I don't see the value in trading assets for yet another smaller puck moving guy, whose D isn't that great so far. On the right side, we have Liljegren, Niemala, Villeneuve, Rindell, Hollowell. None of these guys are all big.. so why spend assets, on something we have a lot of?
Now, if this was diversifying our pool, and it was a Braden Schneider type instead... a young physical presence, I'd be... sure, we could use some of that. (and while Schneider was ahead of Lundkvist, his D has struggled so far at the NHL level(It will get there)).
What "comparables" for Robertson do you think got 8.25m x 8? No way he's signing that.
SeaOfBlue
The Passion That Unites Us All
- Aug 1, 2013
- 35,591
- 16,777
Well, then market value has gone up and is ridiculously high for underperforming players... So it is good that we are not in that market.
Previously, the market was seemingly a 2nd round pick for those kinds of guys: Andersson, DeAngelo, Bean, etc.
Guys who went for more than that were better and more proven than Lundkvist. In fact, I would probably pay a 2nd for the guys above before I would pay one for Lundkvist.
This is a pure case of "market value is what you are willing to pay for someone"... Which is fair. Clearly Dallas sees something in him that they like and were willing to pay more than anyone else to get him, and take the risks associated with it blowing up in their faces. One would hope they are making a calculated risk, because if you are risk-seeking and are not making calculated risks, then you are just stupid and counting on pure luck. In general, however, there is a reason why benchmarking, forecasting, and comparables exist. You can choose to go against those if you wish, which is also why things like stocks go up and down, but they serve a purpose of a baseline set of expectations by which people can make decisions and derive value. Companies buy other companies for more (or possibly even less) than their market value all of the time, but if you do something similar to what Adobe did when they bought Figma recently, then it is not like people think "Oh, that is just market value now"; they think "Wow, Adobe really overpaid" and then there is a ripple effect, which in this case was reflected in Adobe's stock price dropping about 25% in the course of a week.
It would be the same thing as if Dubas traded two firsts for a 4th liner tomorrow. I don't think the market value for a 4th liner suddenly becomes a pair of firsts. Now if a bunch of teams started doing it and decided to agree that was the price for those kinds of players... Well then that is different and more than an outlier. Right now, Lundkvist is an outlier.
Long story short, there are a lot better assets that have consistently gone for a similar price to what Lundkvist just returned, and I think the vast majority of teams would agree with me when I would say that I would rather spend those assets on those players or just keep them than make the trade that Dallas just did.
Fogelhund
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2007
- 24,381
- 29,523
Evolving Hockey's model has him at $7.9 mil per.
When I look at RFA's, who signed near PPG, you end up with somewhere in the 11-12% of cap contracts. It's probable that his contract should come in between $9-10 mil.
Which writer though?
Johnston. Seravalli have both said it. I’m pretty sure dreger said it too. Allan Walsh has a a podcast.
He openly suggested that players may take short term to try to bridge to the big jump.
No one knows what Matthews will do for sure. No one knew JG would sign in Columbus. They already had their press conference.
But multiple insiders and pro agents have suggested this is a strategy that players might use.
Just because people don’t like the answer doesn’t make it any less possible. Very few people here predicted Matthews would sign for 5. I was wrong On that one.
A lot of insiders seem to have the same baseless speculation
Matthews signing a 5-year post-ELC contract wasn't unusual though. It's literally the most common post-ELC term for high tier players throughout the cap era. And in that situation, it actually does help bring the cap hit down. Matthews signing a 5-year UFA contract however would be extremely unusual, and there's no reason for anybody to think it's a likely route. It would hurt the team and be a pretty big risk for Matthews. Which is why it's so unheard of.
At 8 years?? Not sure where they get the precedent for that.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
Should Flyers trade Scott Laughton for a 2025 2nd round pick?- Latest: BernieParent
