Sean Garrity
Quack Quack Quack!
As mentioned above, most Ducks' fans think of him more as a 30-30 type guy. He consistently drives the play on any line that he plays on, and that includes when he plays with the twins.
Value of: Rickard Rakell
- Thread starter DaNaultinus
- Start date
As mentioned above, most Ducks' fans think of him more as a 30-30 type guy. He consistently drives the play on any line that he plays on, and that includes when he plays with the twins.
DaNaultinus
The Human Fund Donor
- Mar 25, 2013
- 641
- 109
What about Pacioretty + 1st/Prospect (Sherbak, Juulsen)? Helps you guys on left wing and gives the habs a center. Contracts are about the same cap hit. I know Pacioretty is older and only has 3 years on his contract. The First or Prospect would balance that out and give you a guy shortly able to make an impact soon on your team.
Arthuros
Registered Snoozer
Jesus, are you on our side or the Habs?
For your fanbase's sake, I'll say no, because it would not take that much to get Rakell from us.
DaNaultinus
The Human Fund Donor
- Mar 25, 2013
- 641
- 109
Jesus, are you on our side or the Habs?
For your fanbase's sake, I'll say no, because it would not take that much to get Rakell from us.
The way your fan base was talking I thought that an over payment but maybe what would be needed to get him. Would it be Patches only? What do you perceive as fair value?
Arthuros
Registered Snoozer
That would be the overpayment we would want for Rakell, yes.
Realistically, in a vacuum where cap space didn't matter and both Rakell and Pacioretty were replaceable, fair value would probably be Rakell + a 1st for Pacioretty.
Mtl: Fowler, Rakell = 8mill cap
Anh: patches, beaulieu(top 4 LD)= 5.5 mill cap
Picks & prospects could be added to balance it out, but think this is close value. I would add a 2nd or 3rd on Habs side to get it done
& fowler has to want to sign long term in Mtl.
Anh gets the cap space they need plus a good chance at a 40 g season in patches when he plays with a true C. Patches- gets- perry is a very dangerous line. Habs become a.more balanced team
Anh: patches, beaulieu(top 4 LD)= 5.5 mill cap
Picks & prospects could be added to balance it out, but think this is close value. I would add a 2nd or 3rd on Habs side to get it done
& fowler has to want to sign long term in Mtl.
Anh gets the cap space they need plus a good chance at a 40 g season in patches when he plays with a true C. Patches- gets- perry is a very dangerous line. Habs become a.more balanced team
DaNaultinus
The Human Fund Donor
- Mar 25, 2013
- 641
- 109
Well thats much cheaper than I expected. The cap wouldnt work for Montreal right now but they could move a 4th liner to make it work.
DaNaultinus
The Human Fund Donor
- Mar 25, 2013
- 641
- 109
dracom
Registered User
You're crazy. We're not trading our best young forward for Patches. We would only trade him for a similar age and talent player. You don't seem to understand how important Rakell is to our present and our future. If they want Rakell, it's Galchenyuk or bust.
So we give up the highest value assets in the deal? Not a chance. Fowler is better than Beaulieu and they are the same age. Rakell is MUCH younger than the guy who only has 3 years left and then becomes a FA when he hits 31 years old, while Rakell still has 6 years left at a cheaper contract that takes him into his prime years. Patches is extremely overrated. Rakell already has more goals than Patches in 8 less games btw.
Arthuros
Registered Snoozer
You missed the part where I said "if Rakell and Pacioretty were replaceable". They aren't. Both teams do not have a replacement for Pacioretty and Rakell, and quite frankly, it would be crazy for either team to trade either player.
I'm not advocating for trading Rakell, I'm saying that if we look at their value that way, Rakell's value alone is not worth Patches.
Let's not undersell Pacioretty here. He is clearly the better player. 35-goal scorers aren't worth nothing these days.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,476
- 35,939
Well I think he is strictly talking value which value wise Patches is much higher, but doesn't necessarily mean wed do it or it makes sense... I don't know much bout patches ... but I think rakells creativity is what is important to the roster we have, so if I was moving him id look for a player that can make his own offense. And if I'm offering rakell + a first id likely be looking at galyWell thats much cheaper than I expected. The cap wouldnt work for Montreal right now but they could move a 4th liner to make it work.
dracom
Registered User
And if Lindholm and Fowler were replaceable, they wouldn't be worth as much. Why discuss things that have no basis in reality. Rakell is not replaceable for us. Even in a vacuum, there really isn't that much a gap between the two imo, Patches is the most overrated 35 goal scorer in the league.
DaNaultinus
The Human Fund Donor
- Mar 25, 2013
- 641
- 109
Im assuming you mean Galchenyuk not Gallagher. And thats fair, I completely understand that. I wouldn't want to trade Galchenyuk for the same reason. I think he will end up as a more complete player than Rakell. Seems to me like you guys would be okay at center without Rakell but ducks fan would know better. If thats the case, I think the upgrade at LW would make you guys an even more serious contender for the cup.
dracom
Registered User
Not really. Getz and Perry aren't the same players they were a few years ago. Just adding another top line guy isn't going to make them some unstoppable force that might lead us to a cup. Perry seems to be a shell of his former self right now and Getz is still good, but not as good as he once was. No reason for us to trade away our future for a guy who's already 28 years old and has a contract that takes him to 31; where we either re-sign him to a terrible long term deal or lose him in FA. All while you keep Rakell until he's 29 at a cheaper contract than Patches.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,476
- 35,939
Yea galchenyuk( hes awesome love watching him), I do like Gallagher but not for that price
Yea well our centers w/o rakell playing center is
Getzlaf, Kesler, Vermette and Thompson... which is a very solid center group(really good face off team) ... Rakell also plays a lot more creative/strong game on the wing then he did @ center, I think freeing him up from the defensive responsibilities of a centermen really opens up his offensive skill.
We could use a top 6 winger for sure (ive always liked the idea of Tatar)
KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,094
- 9,729
Disagree on Getzlaf has not declined really at all, last year was an aberration from the sports hernia.
anezthes
Registered User
- Mar 20, 2014
- 4,462
- 2,484
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
To me, it settles out like this:
Q: Why was Rakell potentially available this offseason in the first place?
A: Because Anaheim was in a cap crunch and had several RFAs to sign, him among them, and so they could end up obliged to move him despite not wanting to.
Q: Did Rakell get signed?
A: Yep.
Q: So why would he be moved now?
A: ...he... wouldn't?
Q: Why was Rakell potentially available this offseason in the first place?
A: Because Anaheim was in a cap crunch and had several RFAs to sign, him among them, and so they could end up obliged to move him despite not wanting to.
Q: Did Rakell get signed?
A: Yep.
Q: So why would he be moved now?
A: ...he... wouldn't?
To me, it settles out like this:
Q: Why was Rakell potentially available this offseason in the first place?
A: Because Anaheim was in a cap crunch and had several RFAs to sign, him among them, and so they could end up obliged to move him despite not wanting to.
Q: Did Rakell get signed?
A: Yep.
Q: So why would he be moved now?
A: ...he... wouldn't?
Pretty much. But then Montreal saw him play and remembered he was thrown around in trade rumors months ago and here we are.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 40,476
- 35,939
Pretty much, rakell is playing a fairly new position and transitioning well with the mins he is getting.To me, it settles out like this:
Q: Why was Rakell potentially available this offseason in the first place?
A: Because Anaheim was in a cap crunch and had several RFAs to sign, him among them, and so they could end up obliged to move him despite not wanting to.
Q: Did Rakell get signed?
A: Yep.
Q: So why would he be moved now?
A: ...he... wouldn't?
dracom
Registered User
Agree to disagree. He's still good, but he's not top 5 center in the league anymore, possibly not top 10.
wingsfan17
Registered User
- Jan 20, 2008
- 1,264
- 482
Rakell is a beast. He just continues to improve, and I think he has one of the best contracts in the league. There wasn't even a transition period coming back from his injury. If I were a team with pick 4/5 I'd trade it for rakell.
Ducks in a row
Go Ducks Quack Quack
We have no interest in Beaulieu we have enough defenseman even if we trade one. Rakell has 9 goals 4 assists 13 points in 14 games while Pacioretty has 5 goals 10 assists 15 points in 23 games. Why would we downgrade from Fowler to Beaulieu and why would we get rid of Rakell who is producing great for someone who isn't producing as well? No not trading Fowler and Rakell for Beaulieu and Pacioretty.
Sure he could possibly score 40 goals playing with Getzlaf and Perry or maybe not. Kessel was though to produce much better with the Penguins then he has. Things don't always work like expected.
Getzlaf goal scoring at the very least has declined. 13 last seasons and 2 so far this season.
