HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must use the RUMOR prefix in thread title. Proposals must contain the PROPOSAL prefix in the thread title.

Mackinnon for Hayes and Zibanajad

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-24-2017, 05:04 PM
  #76
Shootertooter
Registered User
 
Shootertooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGWL View Post
Buch, Hayes, First, + Ok prospect. Sure, I'd do a quantity for quality. I think Mack would be insane on the Rangers.

I agree. This might be the only player in the league I would consider adding Buch for.

Shootertooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 08:20 AM
  #77
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Da Big Apple
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
I don't think you understand the concept of a cap dump.

A productive player signed to a reasonable contract for what he brings to the table is not a cap dump.
It is not inaccurate, IMO, to consider that a player, productive or otherwise, who is a lesser piece in a deal, being moved not for productive balance but added specifically to get cap balance on salary, regardless of how large or small his salary is, functions as and thus can legit be viewed, IMO as 'a cap dump'.

What you are talking about is productive value vs salary cost, one such player compared to another [if I understand you correctly].


Quote:
Originally Posted by chet1926 View Post
Comments like this just prove how ignorant 99% of HF is when it comes to players outside their own team.

Lets do some simple math... Colorado as a team scored 166 goals, MacKinnon had 53 pts meaning he was in on 53 of 166 goals, which means he was in on 53/166= 32% of Colorado's goals.

Zibanejad has 37/56=.66 pts per game*82 games= 54pts if he had played 82 games. So NYR scored 256 goals meaning had he been healthy all year he'd been in on 54/256= 21% of the team goals.

Had MacKinnon been on the Rangers this year and produced at a similar rate he'd scored 256*.32 = 81pts.

MacKinnon actually had a really solid year, it's not his fault that our team was completely incompetent, he did everything he could to contribute. In fact if you break down the numbers his 32% rate was with elite company. Crosby's rate was 31.5%, Backstrom was at 32%, P. Kane was 36%, McDavid was highest in the league at 40%.

I guarantee that over the next 5 seasons Zibanejab and MacKinnon will not have similar production rates, MacKinnon will blow Zibby out of the water. Numbers are on my side assuming that Colorado actually does something to get a better supporting cast. As that is the one thing a player can't control.
The whole point of Rangers overpaying for MacK is not just ^, but expectation there would be a synergy of him, Kreider and a fast C, presumably Miller.

Of course, there's overpayment, and there's a point at which it's too much to make sense.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Beezeral View Post
bernmeister proposals are the best.
A --- you're too kind
B --- who am I to argue?

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 10:55 AM
  #78
Shootertooter
Registered User
 
Shootertooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post

A --- you're too kind
B --- who am I to argue?

or reality:
C---you fail to see his sarcasm as he is mocking you.

Shootertooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 11:09 AM
  #79
stubbadub
Registered User
 
stubbadub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 783
vCash: 500
I mean yeah, the points will all equal out, and Hayes is great on the PK, but the impact that a player like MacKinnon brings to a team wins games. Did it this season? No, but that team had nothing in the bottom-six and no depth in defense once Johnson went down for the third season in a row.

stubbadub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 11:27 AM
  #80
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 12,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
It is not inaccurate, IMO, to consider that a player, productive or otherwise, who is a lesser piece in a deal, being moved not for productive balance but added specifically to get cap balance on salary, regardless of how large or small his salary is, functions as and thus can legit be viewed, IMO as 'a cap dump'.

What you are talking about is productive value vs salary cost, one such player compared to another [if I understand you correctly].
The problem then is not your understanding of what a cap dump is; rather, it is your understanding as to what player constitutes a cap dump.

A player with value is never, ever going to be considered a cap dump because that player has value elsewhere if he was to be traded separately. A player like Tyson Barrie could realistically bring back a 2nd line forward.

A player like Francois Beauchemin would need salary eaten in order to be moved. That is a cap dump.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 04:19 PM
  #81
gravytime
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 216
vCash: 500
Av's have turned into a completely incompetent organization. They ask too much for their players.

gravytime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 04:20 PM
  #82
Foppberg
Registered User
 
Foppberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,149
vCash: 500


What he said.

Foppberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 04:23 PM
  #83
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver Canucks View Post
The Avs are definitely not going to trade their franchise center for merely two wingers or players. Good draft picks and prospects must come back as well.
He's the center of a franchise that is struggling to put it very mildly, and it's two top 6 centers coming back.

I like MacKinnon and I also really like Hayes and Zbad and the depth we get from having them along with Stepan.

I wouldn't love or hate this deal as an NYR fan, but I'm a little surprised that people are acting like this would be a criminal fleecing.

I'm not that familiar with where Colorado is at franchise-wide do they have a bunch of very high tier prospects? Are they committed to trading everything that's not nailed down for those type of assets? MacKinnon is a kid himself still.

haveandare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 04:35 PM
  #84
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Da Big Apple
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shootertooter View Post
or reality:
C---you fail to see his sarcasm as he is mocking you.
who was being sarcastic?
Him?
Or I?

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 04:40 PM
  #85
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Da Big Apple
Country: United States
Posts: 12,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
The problem then is not your understanding of what a cap dump is; rather, it is your understanding as to what player constitutes a cap dump.

A player with value is never, ever going to be considered a cap dump because that player has value elsewhere if he was to be traded separately. A player like Tyson Barrie could realistically bring back a 2nd line forward.

A player like Francois Beauchemin would need salary eaten in order to be moved. That is a cap dump.

But the if doesn't apply because there is a conscientious decision to do this deal and not another which gives you that option on the other player.

You are freely electing the opportunity cost described to do the actual deal, which is taking away forever the potential option you describe.

Nothing wrong with my understanding
You have a dif of op

bernmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 05:24 PM
  #86
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 19,072
vCash: 500
Conceding the fact that Nate is hands down the best player in this discussion

I'm not moving guys two top 6 centers for Nate

I'll keep the depth thank you.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 09:17 PM
  #87
Shootertooter
Registered User
 
Shootertooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
who was being sarcastic?
Him?
Or I?

He was mocking you through sarcasm.

Shootertooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2017, 09:38 PM
  #88
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 12,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
But the if doesn't apply because there is a conscientious decision to do this deal and not another which gives you that option on the other player.

You are freely electing the opportunity cost described to do the actual deal, which is taking away forever the potential option you describe.

Nothing wrong with my understanding
You have a dif of op
Well, if that's your understanding, you might be the only person in the world who describes that as a cap dump.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.