Im not a passive aggressive person. If I wanted to single you out I would have... however, there are a handful, and I didnt think I needed to research all who have touched on it.

Even if you were to trade to the 3rd, the 18th plus a top prospect and Schenn is an ENORMOUS overpayment.
- jak521

But Hartnell was a first round pick.

But Hartnell was a first round pick.
- jmatchett383

Im not a passive aggressive person. If I wanted to single you out I would have... however, there are a handful, and I didnt think I needed to research all who have touched on it.

Even if you were to trade to the 3rd, the 18th plus a top prospect and Schenn is an ENORMOUS overpayment.
- jak521

You'd have to overpay to get a top 3 pick in almost any draft. Otherwise CBJ hangs up. Didn't say I'd make the deal, was just a deal that I thought CBJ would realistically accept as its been reported they haven't been impressed with the "couple" offers they have received.

You'd have to overpay to get a top 3 pick in almost any draft. Otherwise CBJ hangs up. Didn't say I'd make the deal, was just a deal that I thought CBJ would realistically accept as its been reported they haven't been impressed with the "couple" offers they have received.
- arichardson22

What if we include this sniper:

Well it's simple then, GM's should just simply use the analytics that fans have access to, and nothing else, since analytics, have never, ever, ever, been wrong. 600+ players in the NHL, analytics gets them all right! Any fan with access to analytics can run an NHL team.

- MJL

One day someone will sit down and explain probabilities to you

You'd have to overpay to get a top 3 pick in almost any draft. Otherwise CBJ hangs up. Didn't say I'd make the deal, was just a deal that I thought CBJ would realistically accept as its been reported they haven't been impressed with the "couple" offers they have received.
- arichardson22

I just dont see the 3rd overall pick commanding two first round picks, a top prospect, and a 50 point under 25 top 6 forward.

IF that was what they requested, I think that 29 teams will have them picking 3rd.

What if we include this sniper:


- jmatchett383

meh...goalie was late

I just dont see the 3rd overall pick commanding two first round picks, a top prospect, and a 50 point under 25 top 6 forward.

IF that was what they requested, I think that 29 teams will have them picking 3rd.
- jak521

The main/initial offer I had was 2 first, Laughton, Sanhiem. I only threw Schenn's name in if it was needed in a scenario where CBJ said up the offer.

One day someone will sit down and explain probabilities to you
- PhillySportsGuy

WE DON'T GOT TIME FOR THIS COVER-UP BULLpoop! IN CASE YOU FORGOT, THERE'S AN ARKILLIAN BATTLE CRUISER ABOUT TO WIPE OUT ALL LIFE ON THIS MISERABLE PLANET.

The main/initial offer I had was 2 first, Laughton, Sanhiem. I only threw Schenn's name in if it was needed in a scenario where CBJ said up the offer.
- arichardson22

I get it.

2 firsts for 1 first is palatable. Two firsts plus two top prospect is not smart.

I get it.

2 firsts for 1 first is palatable. Two firsts plus two top prospect is not smart.
- jak521

Is it S-Mart?

One day someone will sit down and explain probabilities to you
- PhillySportsGuy

Shut up nerd.

Shut up nerd.
- Tomahawk

*crunches numbers*

I am a nerd!

Are they more often right, or wrong?
- MikesPillBottle

You tell me!

One day someone will sit down and explain probabilities to you
- PhillySportsGuy

One day, someone will sit down and explain to you that running an NHL team, and player development, is about more than statistical probabilities.

One day, someone will sit down and explain to you that running an NHL team, and player development, is about more than statistical probabilities.
- MJL

Youre reaching a bit far

One day, someone will sit down and explain to you that running an NHL team, and player development, is about more than statistical probabilities.
- MJL

Youre reaching a bit far
- YuenglingJagr

I know, maybe I should dummy it down some?

I get it.

2 firsts for 1 first is palatable. Two firsts plus two top prospect is not smart.
- jak521

My logic is, wth Harsty coming back in the deal, a current roster player in the top 9 loses spot (Laughton) , and despite his contract, Hartsy is still a contributing top 6 winger and has value in a trade.

Obviously we do not know who we get at #18 , nor the pick for following year's 1st, but I'm sure it could be argued those 2 picks will not have a ceiling or potential equivalent to Puljujarvl. And he fits an immediate need. A big skilled skating winger. And I don't see the team taking a step back so our next year 1st would be similar spot range. Obviously the asset that hurts the most to lose in this trade is Sanheim

I know, maybe I should dummy it down some?
- MJL

Maybe you should just stick to whats relevant considering you took a comment about average goalies getting overpaid and made it about building an NHL team on probablility

My logic is, wth Harsty coming back in the deal, a current roster player in the top 9 loses spot (Laughton) , and despite his contract, Hartsy is still a contributing top 6 winger and has value in a trade.

Obviously we do not know who we get at #18 , nor the pick for following year's 1st, but I'm sure it could be argued those 2 picks will not have a ceiling or potential equivalent to Puljujarvl. And he fits an immediate need. A big skilled skating winger. And I don't see the team taking a step back so our next year 1st would be similar spot range. Obviously the asset that hurts the most to lose in this trade is Sanheim
- arichardson22

There is more to Hartnell than points and he as a player probably doesnt help the team much in the future. I am assuming that the NMC is wiped out...otherwise its obvious...but his value to the Flyers should be lower than some other teams

My logic is, wth Harsty coming back in the deal, a current roster player in the top 9 loses spot (Laughton) , and despite his contract, Hartsy is still a contributing top 6 winger and has value in a trade.

Obviously we do not know who we get at #18 , nor the pick for following year's 1st, but I'm sure it could be argued those 2 picks will not have a ceiling or potential equivalent to Puljujarvl. And he fits an immediate need. A big skilled skating winger. And I don't see the team taking a step back so our next year 1st would be similar spot range. Obviously the asset that hurts the most to lose in this trade is Sanheim
- arichardson22

This is how I look at it.

Would you trade Laughton for Hartnell right now today? I wouldnt.

Would you trade this years 1st, next years 1st and Sanhiem for the 3rd? I wouldnt.

My logic is, wth Harsty coming back in the deal, a current roster player in the top 9 loses spot (Laughton) , and despite his contract, Hartsy is still a contributing top 6 winger and has value in a trade.

Obviously we do not know who we get at #18 , nor the pick for following year's 1st, but I'm sure it could be argued those 2 picks will not have a ceiling or potential equivalent to Puljujarvl. And he fits an immediate need. A big skilled skating winger. And I don't see the team taking a step back so our next year 1st would be similar spot range. Obviously the asset that hurts the most to lose in this trade is Sanheim
- arichardson22

The UFA market is the best most of us has seen since before the cap was installed. I'm not a big Lucic fan but he's younger then Hartnell and could be had without trading anything. Not that we should but with all the names about to hit the market, a team could build a contender through this season's free agency market alone.

Maybe you should just stick to whats relevant considering you took a comment about average goalies getting overpaid and made it about building an NHL team on probablility
- YuenglingJagr

Thats incorrect. My comments were in rebuttal to your comments about not getting NHL GMs. I wasn't the one who brought up probabilies.

*crunches numbers*

I am a nerd!
- PhillySportsGuy

You most certainly are.