HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Game #whatever: Herps vs Derps @ A homeless shelter. 6PM Pacific Terp

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-01-2012, 01:46 PM
  #276
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
Teams making trades at the deadline don't give away their 2nd pairing defensemen, they add defensemen for depth, PP or PK, so yeah, that's a crazy expectation IMO. And I'd want to know what assets would be used to trade for a 2nd pairing PMD who would be better than and/or have a lower salary than Visnovsky. And maybe a list of actual players people think would be available rather than just saying "we could". PMD's aren't cheap OR given away. It seems to me there's a lot of NHL 12 manager thinking going on and not so much real life looking at the team. The Ducks have a good 2nd pairing D to bridge until the prospects are ready. They don't have a 2nd line next year. Why lose that bridge for assets you'll have to likely spend to replace it and possibly need to use some of the assets that were going to be used to address the 2nd line? The only way I'd want to trade Vis is as part of a package for a legitimate top pairing D, which are also not traded at the deadline.
Again, you are looking at it the wrong way. Visnovsky's value is higher at the deadline than the draft. The draft is easier to trade for roster players than the trade deadline. Sell high on Vis at the TD for the most valuable asset possible. Use that asset(s) to trade for roster player at draft.

Waiting to trade Vis at the draft limits his value and the return we will get, and we don't need roster players after the deadline anyway. If we are selling, that means the season is over. Play a kid or journeyman and the draft pick gets better.

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:00 PM
  #277
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,750
vCash: 500
I'm looking at it as what does the defense look like NEXT year. With Vis next year's defense has the potential to not be an embarrassment for the first time in a long time. Without him, it's more fire drill.

Also, I think we will have to agree to disagree. Kaberle was FAR worse than what Vis is and got a great return - as a rental. Teams won't pay a premium for a player who has a 6M cap hit for another year if he's actually declining IMO.

Ducks DVM is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:04 PM
  #278
Lyons71
Registered User
 
Lyons71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Fullerton, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,976
vCash: 500
Trading Vish would kill our team. I don't see why the Ducks would get rid of him. They could never get back players to make up for it.

Many nights, he's the Ducks best player.

Unless the Ducks are signing Weber... Then yes, go trade Vish. haha

Lyons71 is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:07 PM
  #279
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
I'm looking at it as what does the defense look like NEXT year. With Vis next year's defense has the potential to not be an embarrassment for the first time in a long time. Without him, it's more fire drill.

Also, I think we will have to agree to disagree. Kaberle was FAR worse than what Vis is and got a great return - as a rental. Teams won't pay a premium for a player who has a 6M cap hit for another year if he's actually declining IMO.
You are operating under the assumption that Visnovsky is not replaced at all, and/or no one else is brought in. Why?

Edit: and that Kaberle deal is a big reason why I think waiting will severely hurt Vis' value if he is traded at next year's deadline. That deal turned out terrible for Boston, winning the cup notwithstanding, and every GM knows it.

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:21 PM
  #280
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
You are operating under the assumption that Visnovsky is not replaced at all, and/or no one else is brought in. Why?

Edit: and that Kaberle deal is a big reason why I think waiting will severely hurt Vis' value if he is traded at next year's deadline. That deal turned out terrible for Boston, winning the cup notwithstanding, and every GM knows it.
I'm operating under the assumption that getting a 2nd pair PMD will cost more in salary (because they usually do) and/or cost more than the assets received for Vis in a trade this year. As you like to say, I don't think it's good asset management. As the pro-trade group won't identify the players they think could replace him, we can't have an informed discussion on it.


Last edited by Ducks DVM: 02-01-2012 at 02:27 PM.
Ducks DVM is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:32 PM
  #281
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
Teams making trades at the deadline don't give away their 2nd pairing defensemen, they add defensemen for depth, PP or PK, so yeah, that's a crazy expectation IMO. And I'd want to know what assets would be used to trade for a 2nd pairing PMD who would be better than and/or have a lower salary than Visnovsky. And maybe a list of actual players people think would be available rather than just saying "we could". PMD's aren't cheap OR given away. It seems to me there's a lot of NHL 12 manager thinking going on and not so much real life looking at the team. The Ducks have a good 2nd pairing D to bridge until the prospects are ready. They don't have a 2nd line next year. Why lose that bridge for assets you'll have to likely spend to replace it and possibly need to use some of the assets that were going to be used to address the 2nd line? The only way I'd want to trade Vis is as part of a package for a legitimate top pairing D, which are also not traded at the deadline.
Really? Visnovsky, Whitney, and Wizniewski were all deadline trades. All of them are and were top 4 defensemen, regardless of whether they're overpaid or injured at the moment.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:34 PM
  #282
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
I'm looking at it as what does the defense look like NEXT year. With Vis next year's defense has the potential to not be an embarrassment for the first time in a long time. Without him, it's more fire drill.

Also, I think we will have to agree to disagree. Kaberle was FAR worse than what Vis is and got a great return - as a rental. Teams won't pay a premium for a player who has a 6M cap hit for another year if he's actually declining IMO.
There are playoff teams right now that have the same salary concerns we do, New Jersey for example.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:37 PM
  #283
Exit Dose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Cerritos, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
I'm operating under the assumption that getting a 2nd pair PMD will cost more in salary (because they usually do) and/or cost more than the assets received for Vis in a trade this year. As you like to say, I don't think it's good asset management. As the pro-trade group won't identify the players they think could replace him, we can't have an informed discussion on it.
No one knows quite where the market is right now for defensemen, that's why no one is offering anything specific. All we have to go on are silly high prices that have been thrown around for rentals like Gleason.

Sorry for the multipost flood, by the way.

Exit Dose is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:39 PM
  #284
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
I'm operating under the assumption that getting a 2nd pair PMD will cost more in salary (because they usually do) and/or cost more than the assets received for Vis in a trade this year. As you like to say, I don't think it's good asset management. As the pro-trade group won't identify the players they think could replace him, we can't have an informed discussion on it.
There are a lot of players in this league, it would take a while to talk about all of the possibilities.

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 02:49 PM
  #285
Duck Off
HF needs an App
 
Duck Off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Country: United States
Posts: 10,408
vCash: 500
I don't see the point in having this discussion now. It's simple IMO. If we are clearly out of playoff contention by deadline, we listen to offers for Lubo. Yes he's valuable next year to our team, but you at least listen. If some team is willing to overpay for him then you make the move. I'm not saying you take best offer, but if it's a big overpayment you take the deal and hope to find a suitable replacement later. If we are competing for playoff spot then we shouldnt even think about trading him unless we get another top 4 PMD at deadline, which more then likely won't happen.

Duck Off is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 03:16 PM
  #286
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
There are a lot of players in this league, it would take a while to talk about all of the possibilities.
True, however there's a very low number of legitimate 2nd pairing PMD's. Name 3 you think would be available for Vis or the return you expect to get for Vis that would have a comparable salary.

Ducks DVM is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 03:30 PM
  #287
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 25,201
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyons71 View Post
Trading Vish would kill our team. I don't see why the Ducks would get rid of him. They could never get back players to make up for it.

Many nights, he's the Ducks best player.

Unless the Ducks are signing Weber... Then yes, go trade Vish. haha
This season? I'd have to really look hard to find games where Lubo is our best player. He's taken a step backwards this season, and that's why he's been playing a 2nd pairing role. Lubo just hasn't been good enough this season(and he's hardly alone there).

I don't necessarily think he should be traded, but that has more to do with what he makes vs. what he can do. Lubo is a good value, and it will be tough to trade him and still improve. In fact, I don't see that happening at all. His value is immediate. It's short-term. In a rebuild scenario, he's exactly the kind of player we should be getting assets for... but Murray isn't going to go that route. He wants to stay competitive, and Visnovsky is exactly the kind of player that helps us accomplish that while we re-tool.

Sojourn is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 03:41 PM
  #288
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
This season? I'd have to really look hard to find games where Lubo is our best player. He's taken a step backwards this season, and that's why he's been playing a 2nd pairing role. Lubo just hasn't been good enough this season(and he's hardly alone there).

I don't necessarily think he should be traded, but that has more to do with what he makes vs. what he can do. Lubo is a good value, and it will be tough to trade him and still improve. In fact, I don't see that happening at all. His value is immediate. It's short-term. In a rebuild scenario, he's exactly the kind of player we should be getting assets for... but Murray isn't going to go that route. He wants to stay competitive, and Visnovsky is exactly the kind of player that helps us accomplish that while we re-tool.
What does trading him have to with rebuilding? Who says the future assets we would gain from trading him are set in stone in the way we have to use them? This is about flipping an asset at the top of its value arc, not rebuilding from the ground up.

His value at this deadline may very well be higher than his contribution on the ice next year, since it will only be for one year.

DVM, three dmen off the tip of my head:

Pitkanen
Blum
Leopold

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 04:15 PM
  #289
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 25,201
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
What does trading him have to with rebuilding? Who says the future assets we would gain from trading him are set in stone in the way we have to use them? This is about flipping an asset at the top of its value arc, not rebuilding from the ground up.

His value at this deadline may very well be higher than his contribution on the ice next year, since it will only be for one year.

DVM, three dmen off the tip of my head:

Pitkanen
Blum
Leopold
It's about improving the team, and I'm just not convinced moving Lubo does that.

Sojourn is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 04:23 PM
  #290
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
It's about improving the team, and I'm just not convinced moving Lubo does that.
If it doesn't, it will only be for a single year. After that, it's 100% improvement for the organization.

Anybody here have cup aspirations for next season?

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 06:35 PM
  #291
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
You are operating under the assumption that Visnovsky is not replaced at all, and/or no one else is brought in. Why?

Edit: and that Kaberle deal is a big reason why I think waiting will severely hurt Vis' value if he is traded at next year's deadline. That deal turned out terrible for Boston, winning the cup notwithstanding, and every GM knows it.
Actually Kaberle would be something in favor of keeping him. In our circumstances we would be Toronto, not Boston. Meaning we could get quite a bit, even as a UFA to be rental. I guess you might look at rumored Kaberle deals from earlier years and offseasons to compare, but I'm not sure how much of those I really believe.


I think static makes an interesting point. If you concede next season, and if you worry that Lubo will decline and/or leave, then now might be a time to move him. Lots of people here do not want to concede next season. So that's a fundamental difference of opinion.

My biggest thing is that, as someone pointed out earlier, selling typically involves upcoming UFAs. There's 2 reasons for that. a) selling teams rarely do concede next season so they want the player for next year and b) buyers often actually like the expiring contract to be able to re-sign the team cores. Thus I actually don't think Visnovsky's value is highest this trade deadline, I think it's highest at draft (ie pre UFA).

snarktacular is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:16 PM
  #292
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 25,201
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
If it doesn't, it will only be for a single year. After that, it's 100% improvement for the organization.

Anybody here have cup aspirations for next season?
How do you see it as a 100% improvement for the organization?

Sojourn is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:21 PM
  #293
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
Actually Kaberle would be something in favor of keeping him. In our circumstances we would be Toronto, not Boston. Meaning we could get quite a bit, even as a UFA to be rental. I guess you might look at rumored Kaberle deals from earlier years and offseasons to compare, but I'm not sure how much of those I really believe.


I think static makes an interesting point. If you concede next season, and if you worry that Lubo will decline and/or leave, then now might be a time to move him. Lots of people here do not want to concede next season. So that's a fundamental difference of opinion.

My biggest thing is that, as someone pointed out earlier, selling typically involves upcoming UFAs. There's 2 reasons for that. a) selling teams rarely do concede next season so they want the player for next year and b) buyers often actually like the expiring contract to be able to re-sign the team cores. Thus I actually don't think Visnovsky's value is highest this trade deadline, I think it's highest at draft (ie pre UFA).
I understand that we would be Toronto, but I have to think people are looking at that deal with wary eyes. I can't think a ufa dman gets that much again, unless it's Suter.

This market is a big reason why I think he should go now. Dmen are falling off the market left and right, so his value may very well be artificially raised because of it. The only thing against him is his cap number.

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:23 PM
  #294
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
How do you see it as a 100% improvement for the organization?
If we keep Vis and he bolts or retires, we get nothing.

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:31 PM
  #295
Duck Off
HF needs an App
 
Duck Off's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oklahoma
Country: United States
Posts: 10,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
How do you see it as a 100% improvement for the organization?
because getting anything for Lubo would be better then him just walking.

I completely understand what Static is saying and he does bring up a good point. However, my question for him would be: If someone offered a 1st (obviously a contender) and nothing else, do you make that trade right now? I personally would not. I do not have enough faith in Murray to replace him with out hurting the team in some way. Creating that hole IMO increases the possibility of him moving Ryan, which I think is a mistake.

I would like to see Murray wait and see where we are at the deadline. If we're more then 6 points out, I'd like to see him at least entertain offers for Lubo. Similar to the way he did the Ryan talks "here's what I want, if you don't want to give that, then don't bother". If someone offers a great offer that is too good to pass up then you take it, and we look for his replacement this offseason. If that offer doesn't come, we wait and do same thing at draft. If at next year's deadline we're out of it again you deal him for what you can.

If we have a great shot at making the playoffs, then you don't trade him, unless we bring in a replacement that's as good as him.

Duck Off is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:37 PM
  #296
KEEROLE Vatanen
Failures Of Fenwick
 
KEEROLE Vatanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 18,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
Racking up secondary assists does not equate to playing well.

Again, what is the point of having him at a good price for one year and then losing him for nothing? I don't understand the logic.
Wow, even when someone provides facts you continue to spit in the face of them.

KEEROLE Vatanen is online now  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:39 PM
  #297
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 25,201
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Static View Post
If we keep Vis and he bolts or retires, we get nothing.
Okay, that's not a 100% improvement. It's better than nothing, but let's not throw out arbitrary numbers and imply they have meaning.

Yes, getting something for him is better than nothing, but that seems pretty black or white. Trade him because we won't win the Cup next season? Why not take it a step further, and trade every player who won't be here 2 or 3 years from now?

Sojourn is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:47 PM
  #298
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 25,201
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 View Post
because getting anything for Lubo would be better then him just walking.

I completely understand what Static is saying and he does bring up a good point. However, my question for him would be: If someone offered a 1st (obviously a contender) and nothing else, do you make that trade right now? I personally would not. I do not have enough faith in Murray to replace him with out hurting the team in some way. Creating that hole IMO increases the possibility of him moving Ryan, which I think is a mistake.

I would like to see Murray wait and see where we are at the deadline. If we're more then 6 points out, I'd like to see him at least entertain offers for Lubo. Similar to the way he did the Ryan talks "here's what I want, if you don't want to give that, then don't bother". If someone offers a great offer that is too good to pass up then you take it, and we look for his replacement this offseason. If that offer doesn't come, we wait and do same thing at draft. If at next year's deadline we're out of it again you deal him for what you can.

If we have a great shot at making the playoffs, then you don't trade him, unless we bring in a replacement that's as good as him.
I agree. I don't think it's as black and white as saying "let's get something before he leaves." because you still need to fill that spot. How do you go about doing that? Because moving Visnovsky himself is probably not going to do it, even if we did that with Whitney. So, like you said, it's a hole that needs to be filled some other way.

I'm just not comfortable opening up a hole like that in the line-up. Not now. On the other hand, a year from now, we'll have a better idea of where we stand. Schultz, for example, will probably be playing professional hockey. Players who are prospects now, will be looking to break into the NHL. The Ducks will most likely just be in a better position to move him.

Sojourn is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:49 PM
  #299
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
Okay, that's not a 100% improvement. It's better than nothing, but let's not throw out arbitrary numbers and imply they have meaning.

Yes, getting something for him is better than nothing, but that seems pretty black or white. Trade him because we won't win the Cup next season? Why not take it a step further, and trade every player who won't be here 2 or 3 years from now?
I didn't realize you were going to put so much context into the number. But yes, letting him walk for nothing is entirely unacceptable for a team that doesn't participate in free agency or draft particularly high.

As for trading everyone else, you're taking what I'm saying to the absolute extreme. As I've been saying over, and over, and over, Visnovsky's situation is unique because he may very well be on the precipice of a major decline period, over which his value will sink exponentially.

Static is offline  
Old
02-01-2012, 07:55 PM
  #300
Static
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 17,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Static
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckstudd269 View Post
because getting anything for Lubo would be better then him just walking.

I completely understand what Static is saying and he does bring up a good point. However, my question for him would be: If someone offered a 1st (obviously a contender) and nothing else, do you make that trade right now? I personally would not. I do not have enough faith in Murray to replace him with out hurting the team in some way. Creating that hole IMO increases the possibility of him moving Ryan, which I think is a mistake.

I would like to see Murray wait and see where we are at the deadline. If we're more then 6 points out, I'd like to see him at least entertain offers for Lubo. Similar to the way he did the Ryan talks "here's what I want, if you don't want to give that, then don't bother". If someone offers a great offer that is too good to pass up then you take it, and we look for his replacement this offseason. If that offer doesn't come, we wait and do same thing at draft. If at next year's deadline we're out of it again you deal him for what you can.

If we have a great shot at making the playoffs, then you don't trade him, unless we bring in a replacement that's as good as him.
I wouldn't trade him for a straight first from a playoff bound team, but I wouldn't consider that a legit offer anyway. That's an ok deal if Vis was a UFA to be, and would probably be typical market value for a rental of his caliber.

In this market, with his salary next year, his value should be much higher than that. If you'd rather wait for next year, odds are he isn't the player then that he is now, just like he isn't now what he was one year ago. Suddenly, that first round pick may be a stretch, and all we've gained is a useless half-season from him.

Static is offline  
Closed Thread

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 01:55 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.