Proposal: I just became GM!

[Tripod]

I have been playing around on the main board...trying to work some trades that make us worse today...but build to a better future when the kids are coming. All moves are made with 2-3 years from now as the goal yo be better.

Here are the deals so far:

So we now have:

Yak
2nd in 2015
Purcell
Nikitin
4th rounder in 2016

For

Coburn
Read
Umberger

We get rid of Umberger and his 3 year deal...but add 2 dumps that each ends in 2 years.
Obviously...the fingers are crossed that Yak can reach his potential with Giroux, Couts or Laughton as his C. Plus...we get a 2nd back in this draft. And a 4th a year later.

And then painfully...I traded Simmonds.

Simmonds

for

Scherbak + 1st in 2016 + Lehkonen or Fucale plus Allen for salary reasons.

Within 2 years, Scherbak will be ready and playing a lot IMO. He has 28 points in in 19 games in the WHL after having 78 in 65 last year in his draft year. We was a 1st rounder last year.

We get a 1st in 2016 which could be even better since MTL is playing well this year, maybe they have so down year.

And Lehkonen and Fucale were both 2nd rounders....one a LW, one a goalie. We already have Stolarz, so Lehkonen seems like the better choice, but maybe we hedged our goaltending bet and have 2 potential good goalies and see who rises to the top.

And the last one is Vinny for Laich. Both are bad, but we shave 1 year off the deal which is the whole point.

Are we worse now? Yes. Are we set up better for the future? I think so.

Raffl G Voracek
Schenn Couts Yak
Laich Laughton Purcell
Rinaldo Belle XXXX

AMac Streit
MDZ Schenn
Grossmann Nikitin
Schultz Carlo C
Allen

Now of course we have too many D....but that is my next step...to move some for picks or warm bodies...see what we could get.

But in 2-3 years we could be looking at

Raffl Giroux Voracek
Schenn Couts Yak
NAK Laughton Scherbak
Lehkonen Belle Leier

Morin Sanheim
Hagg Ghost
MacD Alt

Mason
Stolarz

Plus...whoever we draft with an early 1st rounder this year and then we have 2 1sts in 2016. Who knows, if it became a top 5 pick we add another impact player....probably F to the group.

All the sudden, we have a nice little pipeline in the way.

I will update this OP if I get an agreement in any other deals.

Would anyone else want this type of rebuild...assuming Snider allowed it?

Click to read more...

 

[RJ8812*]

we can't trade Simmonds. He's our only Power Forward

 

[Tripod]

we can't trade Simmonds. He's our only Power Forward

Jake plays a power game without lots of hitting. Others could learn from that.

 

[FadeToBlack]

...good for you? I mean, what's the point of this? You'll never be the GM and those trades will never happen.

 

[BleedOrange]

Seriously lock this thread its pointless

 

[Striiker]

...good for you? I mean, what's the point of this? You'll never be the GM and those trades will never happen.

Seriously lock this thread its pointless

This thread, just like every other thread on every other forum, is to generate conversations and and discuss things.

If we stopped people from posting things just because a few people didn't like them or because they weren't 100% realistic then neither of you would be posting.

He likes making hypothetical trades and getting peoples thoughts on them, there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[Insulin]

Ignoring the value, I would never trade Simmonds for that type of package. Futures for him just doesn't make sense to me unless it's around a promising young defenseman.

 

[FadeToBlack]

Ignoring the value, I would never trade Simmonds for that type of package. Futures for him just doesn't make sense to me unless it's around a promising young defenseman.

We already have four or five young promising dmen, it's a stupid trade.

 

[Jray42]

Milbury is that you

 

[Insulin]

We already have four or five young promising dmen, it's a stupid trade.

I meant somebody with NHL experience. None of our guys have that.

 

[Flyotes]

I appreciate the enthusiasm.

Really dislike the idea of 2-3 years Raffl still being the winger on the top line as things stand now.

 

[kudymen]

Seriously lock this thread its pointless

I believe it will generate much more constructive discussion than you insisting on trading away Giroux a while ago

 

[BillDineen]

I wouldn't do the Simmonds trade.

 

[MorgantiDrinksBlood]

I wouldn't do the Simmonds trade.

I would, as much as I love Simmonds presence infront of the net on the PP1, he's absolutely useless 5v5. Would we miss his physicality? Yes. But we need to build for the future this team is going nowhere. Simmonds is one of my fav players but I agree with OP.

 

[Psuhockey]

I would, as much as I love Simmonds presence infront of the net on the PP1, he's absolutely useless 5v5. Would we miss his physicality? Yes. But we need to build for the future this team is going nowhere. Simmonds is one of my fav players but I agree with OP.

Nobody really knows the proposed package to Florida but one if the rumors was that it died because they wanted Simmonds. With how well Ekblad has played, would you now trade Simmonds if it meant also getting Lecavalier off this team on top of getting Ekblad? I would.

 

[BernieParent]

First, I commend you, Tripod, for not only constructing intelligent and realistic trade scenarios that got some degree of buy-in from other fan base representatives, but you did so in a conscientious and positive manner in your main board thread.

I like the first deal, but like others would nix the Simmonds one. The line-up you propose lacks some muscle, and I would try all I could to have him slotted in the second line, even challenging him to adapt to LW.

The defense is too much of a turnover and too ambitious for the D prospects. Plus, Streit should be there somewhere.

Otherwise, bravo!

 

[MorgantiDrinksBlood]

Nobody really knows the proposed package to Florida but one if the rumors was that it died because they wanted Simmonds. With how well Ekblad has played, would you now trade Simmonds if it meant also getting Lecavalier off this team on top of getting Ekblad? I would.

The thought of having Ekblad on this team for Simmonds + Vinny gone makes my sick to my stomach :'(.

 

[Jack de la Hoya]

I really don't understand that Simmonds deal.

I would, as much as I love Simmonds presence infront of the net on the PP1, he's absolutely useless 5v5. Would we miss his physicality? Yes. But we need to build for the future this team is going nowhere. Simmonds is one of my fav players but I agree with OP.

The stats say you are wrong, don't they?

 

[DrHamburg]

I would, as much as I love Simmonds presence infront of the net on the PP1, he's absolutely useless 5v5. Would we miss his physicality? Yes. But we need to build for the future this team is going nowhere. Simmonds is one of my fav players but I agree with OP.

What? how he is useless 5v5? Advanced stats will tell you he isn't useless at all. Anyway, Laich for Vinny anyone on the Flyers would do. I would be shocked if the Caps agreed to that.

The first trade makes sense for the Flyers. Might be only way to move umberger.

 

[dingbathero]

Yes on the 1st trade. no to the Simmer trade and yes to the Liach trade.

 

[Pantokrator]

Ignoring the value, I would never trade Simmonds for that type of package. Futures for him just doesn't make sense to me unless it's around a promising young defenseman.

I would not trade Simmonds because of what he brings. A 30 goal 60 point man who brings grit is something that I don't think you can recover from if you trade that. Plus his contract is reasonable and not likely to get out of control.

I like the thread though. As someone pointed out, the whole point of boards is to discuss stuff.

 

[Tripod]

First, I commend you, Tripod, for not only constructing intelligent and realistic trade scenarios that got some degree of buy-in from other fan base representatives, but you did so in a conscientious and positive manner in your main board thread.

I like the first deal, but like others would nix the Simmonds one. The line-up you propose lacks some muscle, and I would try all I could to have him slotted in the second line, even challenging him to adapt to LW.

The defense is too much of a turnover and too ambitious for the D prospects. Plus, Streit should be there somewhere.

Otherwise, bravo!

Thank...it's all for fun anyways. Nothing any of us say, do or think matters or effects the team. I just thought since we are "waiting for the kids", why not make moves that make that future brighter.

I see the point of the Simmonds deal...but I tried to look at years 3-6 from now...when the kids on D are not only playing...but are good. They will play in 1-3 years from now...but should be good in that 3-6 range IMO.

And Sherbak has 1st line potential...plus we add another 1st rounder and prospect. On Paper, Simmonds for 2 1st and a 2nd is pretty good IMO. But I also see why people want to keep him. He is easy to love.

As for Streit...I was looking move into that 3 year window...and his contract is over.

Plus with the deals...ALL the dead weight is gone in 2 years...wil Laich gone in 3 instead of Vinny at 4. Any 2 years from now...is next years deadline...which isn't too far away IF we were to do a mini rebuild.

I just want to have a nice core of F coming and peaking at the same time as our D.

But in reality, as I said, it's all for fun. To those who say it's pointless...so is every other trade proposal, lineup thoughts, who we would draft, etc...it's all pretend. We all think "If I was GM, I would do this......" And when talking to other teams fans, we found some common ground on trades...thought I would share.

Part of me wants to file this away for 2-3 years and remember to look at is to see how bad or good things would have been if these moves were made.

 

[FlyTimmo]

The Oilers trade is not that bad. And I would consider it, but I don't think Edmonton would do it.


I don't see the point of trading Simmonds. He is not a player that relies on his skating or shot, he has longevity. He could still be a very impactful forward in 5-7 years.

I think if I was Hextall, I'd ask for the 2015 1st, but chances are that it is not available, and Yakupov would be my second attempt. Put him on Giroux's wing, and I think he could explode. We lack speed and he has that in excess.

In a perfect world we draft McEichel, and then our mini-rebuild will take off. And we have the perfect young center to go along with: Ghost, Morin, Sanheim, and Hagg. They all we need is to draft or sign a quality LW and we have a contender.

 

[Philadelphia Ducks]

I can't see Edmonton going for that first deal, and I'm not a big favor of that second deal.

Overall, I think we're putting too much faith in ALL of our prospects developing into full time NHLers and living up to their potential. What happens when one or two or even three of them flop? The organization has rarely proven to be able to develop defenseman well.

 

[Prongo]

That first deal has way too much going on for any gm to contemplate making it.

I'm guessing I'm in the minority that doesn't want to trade Coburn and read to just get Yak and a 2nd rounder. I think yak is overrated because of where he was drafted. Coburn for yak is a deal I could work with but Edmonton fans dint want to trade any players of value to help right the ship. We see it all the time with Dan bases here, we all greatly over value our players. Also Edmonton fans want their coach fired again, mact and the players are responsible. They have gone through enough coaches the last few years now.

No way on the second deal. Not trading Simmonds for prospects and picks. Needs to be a big time defender if I'm moving him