See, the odd thing is I had no thought that we'd even be considering the possibility of taking a Dman with the 1st so I did next to no research on those available. For me, it was Byram or a forward. I've now gotta dig into what little game tape I can find and try to determine who I like more. So far, I like Heinola most.
- MaximumBone

We should be taking a forward in the 1st this year unless a miracle happened and Byram became available so I’m not getting this Broberg chatter at all unless they plan on moving a LHD (Klefbom) to try and get some top 6 help

So you expect Winnipeg to pony up a 1st round pick and a 70 point winger (on a sweetheart deal no less), for Larsson and a struggling prospect?
- Wildschwein

I could turn that around and say you expect us to pony up Larsson, a top-10 pick and a former top-4 pick for a guy that just struggled his way to 37 points in 62 games (and fails to score in the playoffs) and a late 1st? Framing makes things look worse than they are.

What I do expect is Winnipeg to pay the premium for a 26 yr old top-4 RD that balances their D corps out and saves them from signing Myers to a regrettable contract and for us to pay a premium for a 23 yr old top-6 forward. Both have come off some struggles this past year so both assets have lost some value, but should be nearly equal.

Larsson ~= Ehlers
Puljujarvi + #8 >>> #20

This having been said, we're better off trading a LD and Winnipeg is better suited pursuing a LD so I propose a counter of Klefbom and Puljujarvi for Ehlers, Copp and their 2nd.

We could call Lucic a 55 point winger using that logic
- Reveen.

Not quite.

I could turn that around and say you expect us to pony up Larsson, a top-10 pick and a former top-4 pick for a guy that just struggled his way to 37 points in 62 games (and fails to score in the playoffs) and a late 1st? Framing makes things look worse than they are.

What I do expect is Winnipeg to pay the premium for a 26 yr old top-4 RD that balances their D corps out and saves them from signing Myers to a regrettable contract and for us to pay a premium for a 23 yr old top-6 forward. Both have come off some struggles this past year so both assets have lost some value, but should be nearly equal.

Larsson ~= Ehlers
Puljujarvi + #8 >>> #20

This having been said, we're better off trading a LD and Winnipeg is better suited pursuing a LD so I propose a counter of Klefbom and Puljujarvi for Ehlers, Copp and their 2nd.
- MaximumBone

Larsson & Pulju for Ehlers & 20

flip pick 20 and a b level prospect for help on the blue

I could turn that around and say you expect us to pony up Larsson, a top-10 pick and a former top-4 pick for a guy that just struggled his way to 37 points in 62 games (and fails to score in the playoffs) and a late 1st? Framing makes things look worse than they are.

What I do expect is Winnipeg to pay the premium for a 26 yr old top-4 RD that balances their D corps out and saves them from signing Myers to a regrettable contract and for us to pay a premium for a 23 yr old top-6 forward. Both have come off some struggles this past year so both assets have lost some value, but should be nearly equal.

Larsson ~= Ehlers
Puljujarvi + #8 >>> #20

This having been said, we're better off trading a LD and Winnipeg is better suited pursuing a LD so I propose a counter of Klefbom and Puljujarvi for Ehlers, Copp and their 2nd.
- MaximumBone

Touché.

As to your proposal, I was under the impression that Winnipeg needed RH D. If that is not the case, then yes, I prefer your proposal.

Larsson & Pulju for Ehlers & 20

flip pick 20 and a b level prospect for help on the blue
- Reveen.

I would hold onto the 20th pick and take Tomasino if he was available....him and Cozens would be a step in the right direction for our future forwards

We should be taking a forward in the 1st this year unless a miracle happened and Byram became available so I’m not getting this Broberg chatter at all unless they plan on moving a LHD (Klefbom) to try and get some top 6 help
- RatedR80

I don't mind drafting D this high; it's a riskier business given the historical evidence, but there's cause to try it. In Broberg's case, I can see a lot of the appeal. His skating speed is McDavid-esque compared to the competition he's playing as he blows right past and through the opposition consistently. His net-driving and fake-outs are rather impressive, as well. He's not quite as explosive as Connor is, but the boy can fly. He positions himself very well and pinches opposing players off effectively, but his passing and shooting arsenals don't wow me and he's not physically punishing.

Touché.

As to your proposal, I was under the impression that Winnipeg needed RH D. If that is not the case, then yes, I prefer your proposal.
- Wildschwein

I think they might want a RD, but I can't really tell. If they like Pionk enough (they might, based on the trade), then they're probably content with him at 2RD but would need a 2LD to supplement.

Morrissey- Bygulien
Klefbom- Pionk
Chiarot- Poolman
Kulikov/Niku

Morrissey- Byfuglien
Kulikov- Larsson
Chiarot- Pionk
Niku/Poolman

I know which I'd rather have.

Larsson & Pulju for Ehlers & 20

flip pick 20 and a b level prospect for help on the blue
- Reveen.

I would hold onto the 20th pick and take Tomasino if he was available....him and Cozens would be a step in the right direction for our future forwards

I wouldn't want any part of Dach
- Reveen.

I won’t revolt if I get him, but it’s not my preference. Neither is Podkolzin.

That’s in 21 right? The same year as the expansion draft?
- RatedR80

2021-22 I think is the last season.

I don't mind drafting D this high; it's a riskier business given the historical evidence, but there's cause to try it. In Broberg's case, I can see a lot of the appeal. His skating speed is McDavid-esque compared to the competition he's playing as he blows right past and through the opposition consistently. His net-driving and fake-outs are rather impressive, as well. He's not quite as explosive as Connor is, but the boy can fly. He positions himself very well and pinches opposing players off effectively, but his passing and shooting arsenals don't wow me and he's not physically punishing.
- MaximumBone

Also prone to turnovers and “low IQ” type plays....if they could remove those aspects to his game then sure we could have something but it is a risk for a top 10 pick

You’re too pretty to be this pessimistic.
- Wildschwein

I think they might want a RD, but I can't really tell. If they like Pionk enough (they might, based on the trade), then they're probably content with him at 2RD but would need a 2LD to supplement.

Morrissey- Bygulien
Klefbom- Pionk
Chiarot- Poolman
Kulikov/Niku

Morrissey- Byfuglien
Kulikov- Larsson
Chiarot- Pionk
Niku/Poolman

I know which I'd rather have.
- MaximumBone

When put that way, it does simplify things.

- RafiDRW

- Wildschwein

I immediately thought “garsh” and had to get the gif.

Also prone to turnovers and “low IQ” type plays....if they could remove those aspects to his game then sure we could have something but it is a risk for a top 10 pick
- RatedR80

I think the low-IQ plays are more plays with risk. He seems to like making flashy plays on offense so I don't like the description of low-IQ. I'd say it's more a faulty risk-calculation.

Low-IQ to me is more the kinds of plays where they pinch with no valid cause, where they shoot from low-danger areas without considering the pass options to higher-danger areas and where they abandon the front of the net when defending.

2021-22 I think is the last season.
- RafiDRW

The strike can (frank) right off.....just get it done on time for once

I immediately thought “garsh” and had to get the gif.
- RafiDRW

Perfectly played my friend, perfectly played.

I think the low-IQ plays are more plays with risk. He seems to like making flashy plays on offense so I don't like the description of low-IQ. I'd say it's more a faulty risk-calculation.

Low-IQ to me is more the kinds of plays where they pinch with no valid cause, where they shoot from low-danger areas without considering the pass options to higher-danger areas and where they abandon the front of the net when defending.
- MaximumBone

While I could argue that low IQ could also include faulty risk calculation I’m also willing to take back the low IQ comment.....that should be reserved for Russell but I can’t think of another term at the moment

The strike can (frank) right off.....just get it done on time for once
- RatedR80

My idea to help them along.

Each team gets a compliance buyout, once per year. If they use it, though, they lose the following year’s.

Lower the UFA age to 24. Limit RFA contracts to a certain percentage [example: 7%] of the contract at max and limit length as well.

Vary hard cap limits based on taxation. Players who sign in Tampa at a lower cap hit than Toronto, but take home the same amount when it’s all said and done.

Lose LTIR as it currently stands. If a player is on LTIR, they have on full season of pay on it before their contract ends.

So you expect Winnipeg to pony up a 1st round pick and a 70 point winger (on a sweetheart deal no less), for Larsson and a struggling prospect?
- Wildschwein

What Bone said.

That's about the highest I'd go for the #20 and Ehlers. Fair offer for both sides, IMO.

Larsson & Pulju for Ehlers & 20

flip pick 20 and a b level prospect for help on the blue
- Reveen.

Rather flip the pick in a package for Zucker.

I'd try to offload Russell in that package if I could, but I don't even think Minnesota would be interested in him.

While I could argue that low IQ could also include faulty risk calculation I’m also willing to take back the low IQ comment.....that should be reserved for Russell but I can’t think of another term at the moment
- RatedR80

Wouldn’t a player who consistently makes correct risk assessments be considered high IQ?

So why exactly is a player who is poor at play risk assessment not considered low IQ?

Risk assessment in plays is certainly not the only factor for hockey IQ but it is definitely one of them.

Wouldn’t a player who consistently makes correct risk assessments be considered high IQ?

So why exactly is a player who is poor at play risk assessment not considered low IQ?

Risk assessment in plays is certainly not the only factor for hockey IQ but it is definitely one of them.
- RonPielep

This suggests I should have stuck to my guns on the low IQ argument