I think a big question is if that makes us a better team. It very well could. Obviously, it gives us more talent, but you have to take into account how players play together and the chemistry of the lines/team. It could be, IMO, that the team is just better without Gaborik, because the lines work better.
2014 Trade Deadline Thread (All General Deadline Talk/Proposals/Blog Rumors in here)
- Thread starter Mcnotloilersfan
- Start date
- Status
I think a big question is if that makes us a better team. It very well could. Obviously, it gives us more talent, but you have to take into account how players play together and the chemistry of the lines/team. It could be, IMO, that the team is just better without Gaborik, because the lines work better.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
All true. Nothing is static. I didn't mean to suggest it was, I was just positing a scenario where, if adding Gaborik once was a good thing, it might be again.
"It could be..." or "IMO the team...is"? Which is it? How much is dependant on the player(s)/asset(s) in return? Do you believe the team is better with its current Gaborik-less lineup than it would be with him in? I think a case could be made here, but I haven't really seen anybody make it. And what kind of player would it require in return to continue to "take into account how players play together and the chemistry of the lines/team"?
Genuinely asking.
Last edited:
FANonymous
Registered User
- Nov 7, 2010
- 4,911
- 0
We could probably trade him to Edmonton along with a 3rd for one of their great young forwards. Seems like that would be equal value as some of the Hemsky threads that have popped up over the years!
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
Couple of points here:
A bottom feeder isn't going to be looking to add at the deadline and Gabby still has a NTC so he isn't going to a bottom feeder.
Contending teams aren't going to send us what we need/want to make a playoff push. Think of a return like Brass/Dorsett/Moore.
Best we get in a deadline deal, imo, is a package of prospects and picks. For the right ones I would make the deal because I don't see him being the key going forward.
if you look at our team and its youthfulness, other than Umbie, who is not going to be here for the next five years? I see the entire top 9 (not counting Gabby) minus Umbie being worth keeping plus you figure Wennberg will be here at some point and hopefully two or three of Rychel,Dano & Bjorkstrand. That's 11 or 12 guys plus 3 for the 4th line without Gabby. I don't see us re-signing him so I say if we're not going to re-sign him take the best offer (assuming it is at least reasonable) and let the chips fall where they may.
A bottom feeder isn't going to be looking to add at the deadline and Gabby still has a NTC so he isn't going to a bottom feeder.
Contending teams aren't going to send us what we need/want to make a playoff push. Think of a return like Brass/Dorsett/Moore.
Best we get in a deadline deal, imo, is a package of prospects and picks. For the right ones I would make the deal because I don't see him being the key going forward.
if you look at our team and its youthfulness, other than Umbie, who is not going to be here for the next five years? I see the entire top 9 (not counting Gabby) minus Umbie being worth keeping plus you figure Wennberg will be here at some point and hopefully two or three of Rychel,Dano & Bjorkstrand. That's 11 or 12 guys plus 3 for the 4th line without Gabby. I don't see us re-signing him so I say if we're not going to re-sign him take the best offer (assuming it is at least reasonable) and let the chips fall where they may.
????
I am saying, in my opinion, the team could be better. I think it is better, but I don't know it is better. We haven't seen how good the current team could be if Gaborik was playing. So, there is no way to know.
As for what I would want in return. I would want a top LW/RW prospect. I wouldn't really want a player who would be put on the team this year, unless it is a really good young LW/RW with size. I don't think any team would trade us a player like that for Gaborik though.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
He's also in the last year of his contract and (at the deadline) four months from UFA status. There's no law that says that a player with an NTC has to stay where he's traded, and being on a bottom-feeder could certainly provide prime minutes and opportunities for a late season surge and a chance to get a boost in a bidding war.
I agree with you.
Bjorkstrand - Johansen - Horton
Rychel - Wennberg - Anisimov
Calvert - Dubinsky - Atkinson
Dano - Jenner - Foligno
I got through 3 lines and didn't have Calvert, Atkinson, or Foligno in yet, so I had to move some guys around. That would be a pretty good team in a few years if everyone continues to develop.
Those are good arguments for why it would be unwise to go around handing long term contracts out to Gabby or other older UFA's. But they're not good arguments for anything we might do in the next couple of years. And we really don't know whats going to happen with some of these kids. Bjorkstrand might not be able to score with the big boys, Dano might not be much better than your average journeyman winger, and Rychel could be a total bust.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Past versions of this exercise have projected Gilbert Brule, Stefan Legein, Joakim Lindstrom, Alex Picard...
You took the words right out of my mouth. I can't project lines for Saturday, let alone 3 years from now.
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 9,163
- 7,244
1. Why would a player with a NTC clause willingly want to go to a bottom feeder? Players have these NTC to control those types of things.
2. Why would a bottom feeder want to part with valuable assets to acquire a high dollar player with an expiring contract if they are not in a playoff chase? That's just not a smart business move on the part of the acquiring team.
For example, a team like the Florida Panthers are only acquiring a player like Gaborik this season if Gaborik himself says he wants to be traded and the only team he will go to is the Panthers. At that point, the CBJ aren't getting much for him because any trade leverage is gone at the time.
Looks like Mayor Bee, our resident vulcan, has been blinded by his love for Burmistrov. Burmistrov is an excellent buy-low option, but Winnipeg is obviously not going to want Gaborik. What they do want, is an improvement on their bottom pair. So think of something based around one of Nikitin, Prout, or Savard.
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,443
- 92
Well straight up, no one. However, a package of a 1st plus gaborik could intrigue a team like Winnipeg or edmenton who are looking for a significant shake up. I personally would look to move Anisimov, Gaborik, and our 2014 1st in a package for Evander Kane+. Anisimov becomes the #2c and a 1st to continue rebuilding while Gabby gives the fan base a name.
Most likely though I agree that it is most likely gabby is flipped to somewhere like phoenix for a blue chip or/and a 1st.
Some assumptions made on your part that may or may not be accurate. The simple answer is that the team in question might be after him for his rights to sign him long term (they would almost have to be for the deal to make any sense). If the player in question is open to that, then it could happen. I don't see it as likely, but I don't see it as impossible as people around here are making it.
I would see that as more of a end of season deal, but the team in question might be wanting to start the process early and flip him before the draft to get back some of the cost if talks stall.
I'm not sure the Jackets have any interest in moving him at the deadline if they are (reasonably) in the race (no matter who the team is), unless they get back something with greater value long term or they already acquired a replacement asset and need the cap space. No I don't consider a draft pick in that category. If they did, without acquiring additional salary, that sounds more like a move to save a few dollars.
Also let's remember that the cost of Gaborik at the deadline is much more tolerable.
In 2-4 years, I would like to think Rychel would be on the 2nd line over Foligno. Either way is fine though.
Well for a lot of the year I've been in the "trade him for what we can get" category. Essentially its gonna come down to where in the standings we're at exactly in those last days before the deadline. The only way I can see him being traded now is if the most obvious and IMO least likely scenario plays out. If its deadline day and we're 7-8 pts out with 3-4 teams to pass then we all know what should be done. However if its anything less than that I say we hold onto him and play the season out. I think its important to realize that as of now as a playoff rental he's not gonna be bringing us back anything very valuable. But as a player on this team he CAN be.
If we can keep our (top) offensive guys healthy it seems, to me at least, that the spot on that "top" line that was destined for Horton is now waiting to get filled when Gabby gets back. Say what you want about line numbers but RJ Umberger should not be seeing much if any TOI with any of our top 6-8 skilled forwards. Guys like Jenner and Calvert (even Letestu besides size/strength and MAYBE speed) are better at EVERY aspect of the game. Skating, forecheck, intensity, shot speed and accuracy, stickhandling, passing, d zone play, hockey IQ/decision making, clutch plays....literally EVERYTHING.
Foligno-Johansen-Gaborik
Jenner-Anisimov-Horton
Calvert-Dubinsky-Atkinson
Letestu-Comeau/Mackenzie-Umberger
That top 9 is split pretty evenly and not 1 line would have issues offensively or defensively(besides certain STRONG teams) being put up against other teams top lines. That top line though, I really think could become a NHL 1st line threat.
If we can keep our (top) offensive guys healthy it seems, to me at least, that the spot on that "top" line that was destined for Horton is now waiting to get filled when Gabby gets back. Say what you want about line numbers but RJ Umberger should not be seeing much if any TOI with any of our top 6-8 skilled forwards. Guys like Jenner and Calvert (even Letestu besides size/strength and MAYBE speed) are better at EVERY aspect of the game. Skating, forecheck, intensity, shot speed and accuracy, stickhandling, passing, d zone play, hockey IQ/decision making, clutch plays....literally EVERYTHING.
Foligno-Johansen-Gaborik
Jenner-Anisimov-Horton
Calvert-Dubinsky-Atkinson
Letestu-Comeau/Mackenzie-Umberger
That top 9 is split pretty evenly and not 1 line would have issues offensively or defensively(besides certain STRONG teams) being put up against other teams top lines. That top line though, I really think could become a NHL 1st line threat.
What's your point? Those guys didn't develop like they should. Which is why I said if everyone continues to develop. I bet old versions also projected Johansen to be our first line C and guess what he is now? Oh, that's right, our first line C.
Well both Niederreiter and Turris have been traded in the last couple of years. Neither went for premium and both are making an impact.
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Perhaps I don't know what your point was in listing lines using only current young roster players and prospects. Just seemed like it was folly to project a roster multiple years down the road and assume the entire top tier of the prospect pool is gonna be in it.
The post you quoted and added your lines seemed to suggest it was best to trade Gaborik because he's old (basically). An your lines seemed to suggest yeah because in a few years Wennberg, Bjorkstrand... That seemed like oversimplification to me so I pointed it out.
Damn you're defensive in here. I'm seeking clarity and I get attitude. Thanks for the typical internet response.
What's the point? I was having fun taking a look at what our team could look like if all of our players develop properly. You are the one with the typical, oh we said prospect x would be good and he wasn't. That's the typical response of someone trying to be a you know what. I am not sure what your problem is with my post. I would suggest you just ignore it and not post a S.A. response if you don't like talking about it.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
It would also appear that you're blinded by logic and reason, then projecting them onto an inherently nonsensical Winnipeg team.
It seems to me that what Winnipeg really wants is to do nothing for their first four or five years, banking on their honeymoon period lasting that long to maintain the STH waiting list. Then they'll make a couple of moves to generate hype and excitement while talking about "sending a message", even if it's mere window dressing. We've seen this here; it's where Sergei Fedorov came from.
I went through Cheveldayoff's entire transaction history a couple days ago on the main boards. His biggest three trades have been picks for Frolik, Oduya for picks, and a pick for Setoguchi. In 2 1/2 years, that's all he's done. Having seen the way that Edmonton and Calgary have done things in the recent past, I don't think Winnipeg gives a damn if they win or lose, as long as people show up.
- Status
