King Heffy Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 (edited) 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: That little bit more may have been a 1st instead of a 2nd. That would have been your preference?? Yes, although at that point I'd just keep Mikheyev. Edited June 27 by King Heffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimito Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Emergency episode coming up soon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Duke Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: We have two firsts, and two seconds the next two years. And we still have our 1st in 2027. Not sure how we're emptying the shelves? The key is to draft and develop well with the picks we have. And avoid contracts like Mik's in the future. 2027 pick swap is wild. Obviously Chicago thought they did well with the Dickinson trade and figured they’d spin the wheel again with Mikheyev. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Just now, King Heffy said: Yes. Yikes. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 8 minutes ago, NoHeart said: Trading away draft picks is the equivalent of an energy drink. A temporary energy boost now, with long term side effects. We are planting the seeds for the next Gillis empty cupboard era. That's one of my few concerns of having Rutherford at the helm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 minutes ago, Rypien-Punch said: 4 M for Marino? yes please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Gave up a second and retention? Ugh 1 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Wonder how the board would react if we bought him out instead? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jaimito Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 Just now, Coconuts said: That's one of my few concerns of having Rutherford at the helm No worries from me. They have a plan and going full steam ahead. And if they win a cup in the next 3 yrs it's well worth it. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Just now, stawns said: Gave up a second and retention? Ugh well, gave up the difference between a late 2nd and an early 4th. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 minutes ago, HKSR said: Pfft... 2nd round pick is never a Canuck. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 (edited) 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: Yikes. I'm 100% opposed to dead cap and would personally fire any GM who even suggested it as an option on the spot. Edited June 27 by King Heffy 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure10Kuzmenko96 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Give up a little bit more to unload the full value or just live with the contract. There's simply no excuse for creating dead cap, and the morons we have running the team don't understand this. Just live with the contract and not improve the team? Our window is now. We wouldn't be able to sign anyone if we had kept Mikheyev. No, this is a good deal. Your hatred for management is clouding your judgement 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyville88 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Big win despite the 2nd rounder Best of luck to him. Hope he can regain his form 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammertime Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Just now, MeanSeanBean said: And I've liked most the moves the management has made and been complimentary of the job they have done. But I'm also ok with criticism when I feel it's warranted. I felt signing Mik was a bad call the day it happened, and it has worked out that way. I think buying him out seems drastic, and I look forward to being proven wrong when they make a huge move with the cap space to improve the team. Feel the same. Mistake was made cost is a 2nd to right a wrong and move on. Tidy piece of work. And I hope Mik siezes the opportunity the way Dickinson has. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, Coconuts said: That's one of my few concerns of having Rutherford at the helm Why is he sweating at press conferences and handing out NTC's like candy on Hallowe'en? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 20 minutes ago, Metal Face Doom said: They have a lot more W's than L's. And they were able to flip a mistake for a W. That's a competent FO. Hey, I agree. More Ws than Ls. But I wouldn't jerk them off too hard over this W. To each their own though. Just think it's funny how much love they're getting for this trade. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Wonder how the board would react if we bought him out instead? I would view it as equivalent. the asset given up here counters out the difference in cap hit vs a buyout. neither option is inherently better, it all depends on the specific situation and priorities of the team in question. Edited June 27 by tas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 (edited) Edited June 27 by Rip The Mesh 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post 48MPHSlapshot Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 11 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Worst of both worlds now with giving up a pick and creating more dead cap. Indeed. If it weren't for the fact that we're a cup contending team with a Jack Adams winning coach behind the bench and a GM of the year nominee running the show I'd be kinda pissed. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: I'm 100% opposed to dead cap and would personally fire any GM who even suggested it as an option on the spot. Why? Florida and Edmonton both had dead cap. Didn't do much harm for them did it? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, Rip The Mesh said: thars actually wrong its 20.79 so he is 2.5 mill off ... the pool man ltir 1 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 3 minutes ago, Coconuts said: That's one of my few concerns of having Rutherford at the helm The alternative is what Winnipeg has done. Close but no cigar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Duke Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, Rip The Mesh said: We can do Guentzel, Zadorov and Myers with that. But does it ever play out that predictably? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.