|
|
Post by Player Rep on Jul 8, 2019 3:01:07 GMT -5
To  C Cole Perfetti SNP 78 - 2.5M RFA 2023 (18) To  RD Alex Pietrangelo TWD 91 - 11.5M UFA 2027 (30) MIN needs a legitimate, reliable & TOP RD. Pietrangelo will provide them that for years to come, plus they have a major surplus of FWD PROSPECTs. Not too mention, Perfetti for Pietrangelo has a nice ring to it. MIN ACCEPT jmcook |
|
|
|
Post by jmcook on Jul 8, 2019 6:17:48 GMT -5
accepted
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2019 7:15:49 GMT -5
Yup
|
|
|
|
Post by Old Greg on Jul 8, 2019 9:02:33 GMT -5
Idk should a last place team really be trading a top 7 pick from a year ago for an aging dman who’s having a poor year? It would be a lot different if minny was a contender
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2019 9:11:36 GMT -5
plus they have a major surplus of FWD PROSPECTs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BOS - MIN
Jul 8, 2019 9:21:55 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2019 9:21:55 GMT -5
plus they have a major surplus of FWD PROSPECTs. Even with the FWD surplus, I don't see an 18 yr old 78 worth a 90+ D at all. There's no guarantee Perfetti will turn out to be a 90+ himself, nor is it a guarantee that Piets WILL downgrade yet, or that severely. It's just too much of a differential in variables for me to accept this. Rejected. |
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Wild GM on Jul 8, 2019 9:55:39 GMT -5
Idk should a last place team really be trading a top 7 pick from a year ago for an aging dman who’s having a poor year? It would be a lot different if minny was a contender Not sure why people suggest he is having a poor year, he is not producing points but he is not on pace for a downgrade either. Not too mention that they will have another TOP 10 pick that will be going towards a FWD. ...cant just keep stock piling assets without acquiring elite talent to help a core develop around. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
BOS - MIN
Jul 8, 2019 10:12:17 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2019 10:12:17 GMT -5
Idk should a last place team really be trading a top 7 pick from a year ago for an aging dman who’s having a poor year? It would be a lot different if minny was a contender Not sure why people suggest he is having a poor year, he is not producing points but he is not on pace for a downgrade either. Not too mention that they will have another TOP 10 pick that will be going towards a FWD. ...cant just keep stock piling assets without acquiring elite talent to help a core develop around. That's not the point though. Perfetti's value isn't even close to Piets, despite his age. I get the whole 'non-GM team wins the deal' thing, but this borders, if not crosses, the line of ridiculous since there's no chance in hell, for example, that if say the Isles offered Drysdale 79 (18) up for a 90+ to pretty much any team, you can be assured that team would want more than just Drysdale for a 90+. We can't allow these super bad deals just because one GM or another claims they're "rebuilding" all the time and that just makes it ok. That's not ok in my book... Sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by Nashville Predators GM on Jul 8, 2019 10:17:02 GMT -5
I would want more for Josi than this deal so I reject as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Wild GM on Jul 8, 2019 10:20:50 GMT -5
Not sure why people suggest he is having a poor year, he is not producing points but he is not on pace for a downgrade either. Not too mention that they will have another TOP 10 pick that will be going towards a FWD. ...cant just keep stock piling assets without acquiring elite talent to help a core develop around. That's not the point though. Perfetti's value isn't even close to Piets, despite his age. I get the whole 'non-GM team wins the deal' thing, but this borders, if not crosses, the line of ridiculous since there's no chance in hell, for example, that if say the Isles offered Drysdale 79 (18) up for a 90+ to pretty much any team, you can be assured that team would want more than just Drysdale for a 90+. We can't allow these super bad deals just because one GM or another claims they're "rebuilding" all the time and that just makes it ok. That's not ok in my book... Sorry. I totally get what you are saying, its just that we cannot have a team of just 18/19 year olds that have no elite talent to help them develop. Sure Perfetti is a TOP 10 pick last season, but slotting him in the lineup next season vs Brodin-Pietrangelo anchoring the blue line, is just second to none. It happened to Kravstov already in MIN. He had a great rookie season & got a boost cause he had supporting cast. Now he has only Kunin to play with & it has stunted his development to the point he will not be receiving upgrades in his second season. Thats not good for MIn as a franchise or this league thats trying to groom more elite assets. Can't help but think MIN is way better off with filling a longterm void at TOP RD while Seider develops, than grooming a kid they already have 4 substitutes for. |
|
|
|
Post by Minnesota Wild GM on Jul 8, 2019 10:21:19 GMT -5
Ok 3 reject /final
2 say not enough value, 1 says too much value
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2019 10:35:49 GMT -5
Ok 3 reject /final 2 say not enough value, 1 says too much value That's because there's also a split in opinion on what's more valuable; youth potential or overall, but not all (22>) youth gets upgraded and not all vets get downgraded. A prospect's potential does come into play, yes... but, at the end of the day, current overalls should actually count immensely for vets. That's all they've got unless they're putting up crazy numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by Old Greg on Jul 8, 2019 10:37:41 GMT -5
Ok 3 reject /final 2 say not enough value, 1 says too much value That's because there's also a split in opinion on what's more valuable; youth potential or overall, but not all (22>) youth gets upgraded and not all vets get downgraded. A prospect's potential does come into play, yes... but, at the end of the day, current overalls should actually count immensely for vets. That's all they've got unless they're putting up crazy numbers. That’s because the way the league is leaning youth is more valuable than veterans even high rated ones |
|
|
|
Post by Player Rep on Jul 8, 2019 10:41:00 GMT -5
That's because there's also a split in opinion on what's more valuable; youth potential or overall, but not all (22>) youth gets upgraded and not all vets get downgraded. A prospect's potential does come into play, yes... but, at the end of the day, current overalls should actually count immensely for vets. That's all they've got unless they're putting up crazy numbers. That’s because the way the league is leaning youth is more valuable than veterans even high rated ones Yeah it makes sense. The potential of an B+/A- 18 year old out weighs the known variables of an aging asset. Just worried that there can be too much liquidation of youth on one franchise causing a ceiling for development. Balance is key. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2019 10:42:28 GMT -5
That's because there's also a split in opinion on what's more valuable; youth potential or overall, but not all (22>) youth gets upgraded and not all vets get downgraded. A prospect's potential does come into play, yes... but, at the end of the day, current overalls should actually count immensely for vets. That's all they've got unless they're putting up crazy numbers. That’s because the way the league is leaning youth is more valuable than veterans even high rated ones Absolutely what I meant, but thanks for accentuating my point. 👍 All I'm saying is leaning youth is one thing, but making a 78 rookie as valuable or more valuable than a 90+ veteran is completely ludicrous. |
|
