Nikishin Go Boom
Russian Bulldozer Consultent
- Jul 31, 2017
- 22,500
- 52,455
so the solution is getting an underperforming asset that we hope can turn it around instead of keeping our under performing asset that could turn in around?
so the solution is getting an underperforming asset that we hope can turn it around instead of keeping our under performing asset that could turn in around?
I think that is how you end up with multiple underperforming assets. The idea that they all "turn it around" is not a given.
I think there is a bit of difference between Boeser and Nino or Tro. Yes they had had down years but I dont think Boeser has ever been thought of as highly as either Nino or Tro. I was blown away they pulled a Rask for Nino trade. When they made the move for Tro I think they gave up more then they can affoord this time around. Maybe who knows but I think the situations are too far off to say it could happen the same way.That's why I mentioned elsewhere a Trocheck-like move is the one to watch for: distressed asset, likely coming off injury, multiple contract years left, team trying to unload him for pennies on the dollar.
The only reason Boeser doesn't scream perfect fit is the cap hit.
Boeser has 45+ points in all of his 5 full seasons, something Nino has done twice in his 12 year career. He is MUCH better than Nino.I think there is a bit of difference between Boeser and Nino or Tro. Yes they had had down years but I dont think Boeser has ever been thought of as highly as either Nino or Tro. I was blown away they pulled a Rask for Nino trade. When they made the move for Tro I think they gave up more then they can affoord this time around. Maybe who knows but I think the situations are too far off to say it could happen the same way.
this would be a great rap about hats. but honestly, I like boeser. I think he needs a different role and to really be held to his defensive work. this is the benefit of having a coach like Rod and the same reason I would justify an inexpensive flier on a similar player in laine, we have a team culture built on hard work and leadership by example. we could surround that talent with guys who would embarrass him into better defensive effort by being more skilled than him and also harder working. I have been hoping for us to take on a case like that for some time. we dominate pace of play but we have to align everything just right to get the offense clicking. we don't have enough guys who can get us a quick one in a game we're being outplayed in.The only reason Boeser doesn't scream perfect fit is the cap hit.
Lol, noI wonder what we'd have to add to get somebody to take KK on. probably morrow or boom.
I agree. They have to much invested in him ego wise and again once the cap goes up his contract will actually be a good one. A little bit of a burn now for a reward later.Lol, no
Grass greener other sideso the solution is getting an underperforming asset that we hope can turn it around instead of keeping our under performing asset that could turn in around?
Grass greener other side
Don't tell Tom that.I don't think the grass is really green on either side..
Exactly this.this would be a great rap about hats. but honestly, I like boeser. I think he needs a different role and to really be held to his defensive work. this is the benefit of having a coach like Rod and the same reason I would justify an inexpensive flier on a similar player in laine, we have a team culture built on hard work and leadership by example. we could surround that talent with guys who would embarrass him into better defensive effort by being more skilled than him and also harder working. I have been hoping for us to take on a case like that for some time. we dominate pace of play but we have to align everything just right to get the offense clicking. we don't have enough guys who can get us a quick one in a game we're being outplayed in.
I wonder what we'd have to add to get somebody to take KK on. probably morrow or boom. I think it would be wise to try to sell him to a western conference team that doesn't see him often. if we could offset salary and add boeser and patches that would be one hell of a forward group. they'd be too smart to take that unfortunately.
I think that's the problem. Do we think RBA is going to allow the "skill" to show through if he's not good enough defensively (and he's not a great skater)? He's got a great shot and this team could use that type of talent, but the question would be "will" they use it.Exactly this.
I'm surprised some of us here think Boeser is an also-ran but Nino and Trocheck set the world on fire. I think Brock is the most skilled forward of the three. To balance that, he's the worst defensively.
He's the type of reclamation project who could really thrive here, demand a higher salary, and then peace. He's only 25. The only thing I don't love about it is his 3 year term because we fall off a cliff 2 years from now. We could still probably make it work but it might be at the cost of losing a Pesce.
In short, I love the idea, but I'm not sure it will be worth the risk. I really wish he signed for 2 years.
I think the issue with Monahan is health. Dude's made of glass.Always wanted to see how Monahan would look on this team. Perhaps Rod could properly motivate him
You think someone would take that contract without us adding something?!?Columbus isn’t giving away Laine.
We aren’t adding to Kotkaniemi to get rid of him. 1. His buyout is super cheap. 2. He isn’t bad.
Why would we add something nice to get rid of him when his buyout will be less than 1% of the cap?You think someone would take that contract without us adding something?!?
Impressive. Tell me more. Please don’t say his buyout is cheap again, that’s our rationale amongst ourselves….you can’t expect anyone else to actually buy into that one.
Why would anyone trade for someone they would buy out at all? If it’s even on the table why would they do it? He’s not a desirable player for acquisition, and he has so many years left on the contract. It’s a cap problem in a world where everyone makes everyone pay to take a cap problem. We’d have to be taking back a bad contract or paying them to take him because that’s the cost of business right now. No one takes on that contract with the reasoning they can buy it out, not without taxing us.Why would we add something nice to get rid of him when his buyout will be less than 1% of the cap?
when did I say we were trading him? And we wouldnt use the buyout reason for someone to take him. We wouldnt trade him with a good sweetener knowing that the buyout is minimal. just keep the sweetener and eat his less than 1% cap hit for however long.Why would anyone trade for someone they would buy out at all? If it’s even on the table why would they do it? He’s not a desirable player for acquisition, and he has so many years left on the contract. It’s a cap problem in a world where everyone makes everyone pay to take a cap problem. We’d have to be taking back a bad contract or paying them to take him because that’s the cost of business right now. No one takes on that contract with the reasoning they can buy it out, not without taxing us.
He has two goals playing with studs. This is our problem to deal with, I don’t see anyone raising their hands to help us unless we make them an offer they can’t say no to. We’re biting the bullet here.