Jump to content

Around The NHL 2016/2017

The Unknown Poster
in Winnipeg Jets Discussion

Featured Replies

comment_251515
2 hours ago, Atomic said:

Every time you move out someone, you lose someone else in the expansion draft.  Say, you trade Perreault and get a pick and a prospect.  Now you lose Armia/Lowry instead.  Net Gain = Add pick and prospect, lose Perreault and Armia/Lowry.  If you don't move Perreault, Net Gain = lose Perreault.  Is one necessarily better than the other?

Perreault has more value, so you could actually get something and steer the Vegas to a lower value player.  Also, then you can protect Lowry.

I'd rather lose Armia for nothing over Perreault.

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Views 126.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Most Popular Posts

  • Atomic
    Atomic

    This really pisses me off.  Teams like the Blues, Habs, and Bruins all hit a slight speed bump and they have no hesitation whatsoever in replacing the coach.  The Jets suck year-in and year-out and th

  • Atomic
    Atomic

    Where did Bill get $395 million?!?

  • Atomic
    Atomic

    What an idiot.  I have no patience for things like that.  Should be zero tolerance, 100-game ban for first offence, lifetime for second.  That's not an accident, that's not something that just happens

comment_251518
10 minutes ago, JCon said:

Perreault has more value, so you could actually get something and steer the Vegas to a lower value player.  Also, then you can protect Lowry.

I'd rather lose Armia for nothing over Perreault.

You're losing both if you trade one away.  I'd rather lose one for nothing than both and get back a prospect and/or pick who may or may not ever be NHL players.

comment_251519
Just now, Atomic said:

You're losing both if you trade one away.  I'd rather lose one for nothing than both and get back a prospect and/or pick who may or may not ever be NHL players.

But you're not losing anything in a trade. There's no reason you can't get a NHL ready prospect back in return (that's expansion draft protected).

And, there's no reason you can't flip those assets into another piece this summer.

comment_251520
7 minutes ago, JCon said:

But you're not losing anything in a trade. There's no reason you can't get a NHL ready prospect back in return (that's expansion draft protected).

And, there's no reason you can't flip those assets into another piece this summer.

What do you mean you're not losing anything?  You're losing the player you traded away.  An "NHL-ready prospect".... what is that?  How do you know they are NHL ready?  Are you getting a prospect that can replace Perreault's 40 points next year?  The year after?  2 years?  When?  Are you getting a Lowry/Armia type of guy back?  So you trade away Perreault for a Lowry/Armia type and then lose Lowry/Armia in the draft?  Logically it just makes no sense.

comment_251521
7 minutes ago, Atomic said:

What do you mean you're not losing anything?  You're losing the player you traded away.  An "NHL-ready prospect".... what is that?  How do you know they are NHL ready?  Are you getting a prospect that can replace Perreault's 40 points next year?  The year after?  2 years?  When?  Are you getting a Lowry/Armia type of guy back?  So you trade away Perreault for a Lowry/Armia type and then lose Lowry/Armia in the draft?  Logically it just makes no sense.

Losing something suggests not getting something in exchange. It's a trade.

And, you need to make room for some of the youth coming through anyhow.

No, I'm not suggesting we get a Lowry/Armia in exchange.

And, by your logic, why would we give away Perreault's 40 points a season for nothing?

Edited by JCon

comment_251529
27 minutes ago, JCon said:

Losing something suggests not getting something in exchange. It's a trade.

And, you need to make room for some of the youth coming through anyhow.

No, I'm not suggesting we get a Lowry/Armia in exchange.

And, by your logic, why would we give away Perreault's 40 points a season for nothing?

  • Losing something suggests losing something.  An asset that is no longer with the team.  And that is going to happen either way due to the expansion draft.
  • Make room for youth?  What??  Who??  We have room.  We have close to the youngest team already.  Do we really need to get even younger?  Let Connor and Roslovic fight for a spot next year and if they can't earn one they will be brought up eventually as injury-replacements.  No need to ship out good players to "make room."
  • Then what are you suggesting we get?  A kid that has never played in the NHL?  There is no way to know if that kid is NHL-ready then.  That's a gamble.
  • I wouldn't give away Perreault, I would protect him.
comment_251530
21 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Perreault is a victim of being paid 2 much. They probably see Connor in that 2nd line LW spot. 4.125 Is a lot for a 3rd line winger and the savings can go to little trouba ehlers Morrissey Laine etc cuz they ain't gonna be cheap 

Sure has looked good on the top line with Scheif and Laine.  We're bumping Perreault to the third line now for a guy who got demoted to the AHL after being totally ineffective in the NHL?  Maybe Connor will develop into a top-six guy but it's not guaranteed.  Pump the brakes.

comment_251539
17 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Once you realize the future is scheif Laine ehlers Connor and the young guys it will make moving on from Perreault who isn't a part of any core group a lot easier 

He's a part of the core group right now and for the next 3 years.  Connor?  Why Connor?  Why not whoever we pick in the top 10 this year?  Give it a few years and you'll be bitching about those guys you call the core group and saying we should move on to younger players.  And so the team never improves.  But hey they're young!!

comment_251547
1 hour ago, Atomic said:

He's a part of the core group right now and for the next 3 years.  Connor?  Why Connor?  Why not whoever we pick in the top 10 this year?  Give it a few years and you'll be bitching about those guys you call the core group and saying we should move on to younger players.  And so the team never improves.  But hey they're young!!

This team will start competing more when the reigns are handed over to the younger players.  You'd think being swept in 4 a couple years back would show you its time to move on from some vets and transition to a younger team with a brighter future. Perreault Is NOT part of the core. 

comment_251555
57 minutes ago, Goalie said:

This team will start competing more when the reigns are handed over to the younger players.  You'd think being swept in 4 a couple years back would show you its time to move on from some vets and transition to a younger team with a brighter future. Perreault Is NOT part of the core. 

Yes, Perreault is part of the core, right now and for the next 3 years.  Younger does not necessarily mean better.  I don't know why you don't understand this basic, simple concept.  2 years back we got swept, now we're younger and going to miss the playoffs.  God I'm just so happy at how great the team is now.  Oh wait, I already know, it's the coaches' fault, the veterans, everyone other than your precious, perfect kids with bright futures.

comment_251556
1 hour ago, bustamente said:

Down the road not tomorrow, these guys are a long way off but in time decisions will have to be made just like they did with Ladd.

Let them earn their spots.  Shipping out Ladd made sense because he was done.... but if we hadn't drafted Laine we would be up **** creek right now in last in the conference.

comment_251563
Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

Little and Wheeler will get fairness offers based on age and production. And if they want to juice their offers by going to free agency like Ladd, then they will be traded for solid assets. 

I think Little may settle for 5.5 x 6 and personally I would give him that, but I want no part of Wheeler on a big money /term contract.

    comment_251568
    5 hours ago, Atomic said:
    • Losing something suggests losing something.  An asset that is no longer with the team.  And that is going to happen either way due to the expansion draft.
    • Make room for youth?  What??  Who??  We have room.  We have close to the youngest team already.  Do we really need to get even younger?  Let Connor and Roslovic fight for a spot next year and if they can't earn one they will be brought up eventually as injury-replacements.  No need to ship out good players to "make room."
    • Then what are you suggesting we get?  A kid that has never played in the NHL?  There is no way to know if that kid is NHL-ready then.  That's a gamble.
    • I wouldn't give away Perreault, I would protect him.

    You're not losing anything. When I trade money for a product, I'm not losing money. 

    Protect Perreault and let Lowry get taken? That would be crazy. What a waste of an asset. That's just losing. 

    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    Go to topic listing