• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12,274 Excellent

1 Follower

About AustinDuck27

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday July 9

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

14,480 profile views
  1. Murray is boycotting Sweden until Hampus signs.
  2. Good thing is, if they skate around with puke on their jerseys nobody would notice. I'll see myself out.
  3. So much this. It's all clown shoes. You would... the same FAKE FAN that picked Chicago over Anaheim in '15. (that never gets old) Ok, I'm done here, back to your grass related sports.
  4. I don't remember T playing for Atlanta.
  5. HL is losing a pretty considerable chunk of prorated change for every day that he sits it Sweden. Maybe that's a silver lining, the out-of-pocket payout for this season is less the longer it drags out. Not sure if that's adding any pressure to either side or being exploited at all, but I find it to be an interesting minor aspect that isn't being mentioned. [edit] Just spitballing, but let's say that the divide between the two sides right now is a difference of $500k. That's $3MM over the course of the 6 year contract being reportedly on the table. How much of that $3MM is lost by the time he signs?
  6. Ouch. That's going to be true until a team wins it all without all the little flashy speedsters, then everyone will be saying how those teams need to get bigger and/or tougher. Or maybe I just refuse to believe that this is a permanent direction the league is going... boo.
  7. We just need more skill up and down the lineup, simple as that. Getting Rakell and Lindholm back will eventually be a big help, maybe enough to tip a few more of these one goal games back our way. But unless Murray pulls a rabbit out of his hat, it's going to be a long season.
  8. So Murray couldn't afford Palms' next payday, that's fine, but why did he need to move him an entire season before that payday was due? Palms would still have been an RFA the following summer, and I fail to see how there was any downside to keeping him around until then to provide a team that was supposed to be going for the Cup some cheap depth scoring. At worst, he stagnates and continues to muddle around the bottom 9, with that 2nd/3rd round pick value still a safe bet at the end of it. At best? Well... how about that 30 goal season, maybe that could have been for us. Maybe he wouldn't have seen the same opportunity here, fair enough, but at the very least there was a good chance that he improved his value over that next season from the package Murray settled for. Explain why it was a sound decision to dump Palms 12 months ahead of a payday, just to bring in Chris freakin' Stewart? What GM going for it all makes a move like that? It wasn't even a cost-saving move. The answer is simple: Murray fired a warning shot at the "guys who have been there before" before the playoffs, and someone needed to pay the price. Palms had a weak playoffs, so there ya go. Murray just threw out whatever ridiculous explanation made sense. I'm not saying Palms was some immovable piece to our roster, far from it, but Murray decided to move him in a way that was very poor asset mgmt, and we're paying the price for it now. DTS is right about the contract thing, we had one too many bodies after picking up McGinn at the deadline. But there were better options to move out, especially if the best offer Murray could find was within our division and meant retaining salary FFS. Ritchie should never have been up with the team going into the playoffs, that was ridiculous. Maroon should have been there in that spot, and he should be playing for Ritchie as we speak. A $2M power LW that can play up and down the roster from lines 1-4 is the sort of bargain contract we need right now. How could Murray not have seen this? It took me 5 minutes on CapFriendly last season to assess that it wasn't a wise move for our LW talent pool or our finances, yet somehow Murray is signing plugs and leaning on 3rd line AHL'ers to fill the void. Why would he be so hasty in moving Maroon for zero in return and retained salary? Another simple answer, Maroon was a poster boy for the issues Murray had with the players last season, and Murray needed to make an example of someone. He once again made a decision based on something other than was was best for the cap situation and best for the on-ice product. I didn't want to rehash this, darn you! LOL None of this is directed at you btw, wata, love your posts and never mind seeing things differently.
  9. That's an interesting option, even more doable once they get back to Anaheim and Randy can shelter the kids more and the callups are only a couple hours away. Not thrilling of course, but what is right now? Vermette hasn't impressed me much offensively, and I'm not sure he's the right player to retrieve pucks and cycle with the twins. And our bottom six being some combo of Sgarbossa-Sorensen and Etem-Wagner is pretty pathetic, but I like your thought to load of the top six as best we can and let the leaders lead.
  10. Garbs hasn't been adding much either, he's had a good shift here or there, but hasn't looked like the same spark plug he was last season. Seeing him on our top line would be soul-crushing, and that's not a slam on the player (screw him anyhow). Sadly, these are our options: Ritchie, Raymond, Boll, Garbutt, Etem... AHL kids... or yanking guys like Cogs, Vermette, or Silf to shoehorn into that spot, which just takes them away from other areas of need. Deck chairs being shuffled. I think Nick's window is until Rakell returns, then there are more options. Randy could do something like: Rakell - Getzy - Perry // Cogs - Kesler - Silfver // Garbutt - Vermette - Sorensen // Ritchie - Wags - Etem
  11. I see, I sort of dumbed-down your point, and I agree with your ownership angle. The Palmieri, Maroon, MP22, etc. moves are still relevant to the overall financial issues and talent bleed that has been going on, but are more of the secondary variety of mistakes which compound the issue of the bigger ones (for example: we can't add that extra impact forward needed because of Stoner's salary, then Bob lets an affordable depth scorer go for peanuts... or retention(!)... and now we need to fill both roles without adequate budget space to fill either). I also have to wonder how much input our owners had on some of these decisions, or perhaps on the players Murray wanted to pursue but was nixed and forced to settle.
  12. No, that's been bothering me as well.
  13. I'm not as down on Nick's play as others just yet, but who else do we have??? If we demote him to a depth line, who is going to fill out the top six? And please don't say Garbutt. I wish Kerdiles had stayed healthy for once, he might have been a nice wildcard out of camp this season.
  14. Exactly this. Feel free to disagree, but I'd like to add the Palmieri trade and Maroon trade to this. I know others feel that both guys had played their way into those trades, so I won't get into that debate, but the fact that he traded Palms a full year ahead of his RFA contract being due, when affordable depth scoring was in need, and traded Maroon with $500k being retained is pretty tough to justify IMO.
  15. ^^^ Haha, well played, a 'like this' for both of you. Not anonymously though, I want the world to know of my generosity. Still waiting for this east coast deal to drop...