Rumor: All Purpose Trade Proposals, Speculation and Rumours - 2023/24

[surixon]

Adding at the deadline didn’t help, in fact it might have backfired this year and made us slower and less cohesive defensively.

Our team, as is, had us in 1st place in the NHL at one point this season. It’s not like they needed help to get there, the team earned their way there by executing the game plan. Trade deadline assets usually bump guys down the line up and and change chemistry but is that change positive or negative? We lost the identity that got us to 4th OA. Right from the opening puck drop in the playoffs the team speed seemed off? Was that all Tofolli and Monahan’s fault….of course not but they might have made a bad situation worse.

I don’t love the narrative that going with the guys that brought us success is sitting on the sidelines, that feels like we are selling those guys short that filled those roles well. I like trying to win too but changing out 33% of our top 6 flopped. Maybe going with the guys that got us there might have made it easier to get back to the system at some point, to recover after the knock downs.

This isn’t even about the draft picks it’s about winning. How bad did Sean and Tyler even want it, this off season one of them went to play with his buddy in Columbus, the other willingly signed his sunset deal with a team in the middle of a full rebuild ensuring he won’t be competing for a cup again. Couple of guys that are not hungry to win

This post wasn’t meant to single you out Joe, I am howling at the moon, clearly venting, I am tired of watching this team collapse come playoff time.

Well said. Perhaps if they do want to add they need to vet the players better before they do it. We've really only gotten it right once at the deadline with Stastny.

 

[LowLefty]

Well said. Perhaps if they do want to add they need to vet the players better before they do it. We've really only gotten it right once at the deadline with Stastny.

Exactly -
And that's what GM's are for - building / enhancing rosters.

 

[surixon]

Exactly -
And that's what GM's are for - building / enhancing rosters.

Gotta wonder if we need better pro scouts. They are the ones that assemble the info for the GMs on players.

 

[WolfHouse]

Gotta wonder if we need better pro scouts. They are the ones that assemble the info for the GMs on players.

Still wonder if Chevy didn't sign toffoli to replace vilardi and not perfetti... just in case he wasn't ready after surgery

Timelines fit better and we have just misread it as a perfetti upgrade...

 

[LowLefty]

Gotta wonder if we need better pro scouts. They are the ones that assemble the info for the GMs on players.

I agree - and who's job would it be to recognize if that is an issue?
It all falls back to the GM -

 

[surixon]

I agree - and who's job would it be to recognize if that is an issue?
It all falls back to the GM -

So are you on the replace Chevy train? My thinking is we need some fresh to identify the gaps.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I would say every year there are 31 losers and 1 winner

We could just sit on the sidelines and gather picks and prospects but I like trying to win also

Are you ever going to play those picks and prospects? Of course you are. So you are not sitting on the sidelines.

Edit: Go back to the comment you replied to at the start. Is every attempt at getting better, no matter how dumb, a good thing just because it is doing something?

This discussion is not about Hayes. It is about what is the best way to go about winning. No one is suggesting sitting on the sidelines. And I haven't even taken a position in this discussion. I'm only commenting on the idea that what we are talking about here is Kevin Hayes. Who gives a f*** about Kevin Hayes?

 

[tbcwpg]

Are you ever going to play those picks and prospects? Of course you are. So you are not sitting on the sidelines.

Edit: Go back to the comment you replied to at the start. Is every attempt at getting better, no matter how dumb, a good thing just because it is doing something?

This discussion is not about Hayes. It is about what is the best way to go about winning. No one is suggesting sitting on the sidelines. And I haven't even taken a position in this discussion. I'm only commenting on the idea that what we are talking about here is Kevin Hayes. Who gives a f*** about Kevin Hayes?

The best way to go about winning to me isn't piling up picks and prospects and hoping all of them hit at the same time and we're somehow able to fit all the extensions in under the cap.

 

[JetsFan815]

Adding at the deadline didn’t help, in fact it might have backfired this year and made us slower and less cohesive defensively.

Our team, as is, had us in 1st place in the NHL at one point this season. It’s not like they needed help to get there, the team earned their way there by executing the game plan. Trade deadline assets usually bump guys down the line up and and change chemistry but is that change positive or negative? We lost the identity that got us to 4th OA. Right from the opening puck drop in the playoffs the team speed seemed off? Was that all Tofolli and Monahan’s fault….of course not but they might have made a bad situation worse.

I don’t love the narrative that going with the guys that brought us success is sitting on the sidelines, that feels like we are selling those guys short that filled those roles well. I like trying to win too but changing out 33% of our top 6 flopped. Maybe going with the guys that got us there might have made it easier to get back to the system at some point, to recover after the knock downs.

This isn’t even about the draft picks it’s about winning. How bad did Sean and Tyler even want it, this off season one of them went to play with his buddy in Columbus, the other willingly signed his sunset deal with a team in the middle of a full rebuild ensuring he won’t be competing for a cup again. Couple of guys that are not hungry to win

This post wasn’t meant to single you out Joe, I am howling at the moon, clearly venting, I am tired of watching this team collapse come playoff time.

Well said. The trade deadline grass isn't always greener on the other side. I myself wanted to stand pat at the deadline and tinker around the margins so we're not just saying it with the benefit of hindsight.

 

[Gil Fisher]

Not many bushes nowadays...

The kids today have it so good.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The best way to go about winning to me isn't piling up picks and prospects and hoping all of them hit at the same time and we're somehow able to fit all the extensions in under the cap.

Did someone say it was? Did I?

 

[tbcwpg]

Did someone say it was? Did I?

"Are you ever going to play those picks and prospects?" Also many have been against spending at the deadline in favour of "draft and develop".

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

"Are you ever going to play those picks and prospects?" Also many have been against spending at the deadline in favour of "draft and develop".

How does asking that question imply "piling up picks and prospects and hoping all of them hit at the same time and we're somehow able to fit all the extensions in under the cap"?

The alternative to TD rentals is not some extreme of hoarding picks and prospects and never trying to win.

I have been against the more expensive TD acquisitions forever. I made an exception this year because it appeared that everything was lining up for us to go for it. It didn't work out. I'm not going to criticize going for it in hindsight now.

That said, I can question the wisdom of the particular rentals we got. I wanted Lindholm, not Monahan. I would not have been in favour of outbidding Canucks for Lindholm though. That price was just too high. As has been pointed out here, the rentals didn't help in the PO and probably actually hurt our performance.

 

[tbcwpg]

How does asking that question imply "piling up picks and prospects and hoping all of them hit at the same time and we're somehow able to fit all the extensions in under the cap"?

The alternative to TD rentals is not some extreme of hoarding picks and prospects and never trying to win.

I have been against the more expensive TD acquisitions forever. I made an exception this year because it appeared that everything was lining up for us to go for it. It didn't work out. I'm not going to criticize going for it in hindsight now.

That said, I can question the wisdom of the particular rentals we got. I wanted Lindholm, not Monahan. I would not have been in favour of outbidding Canucks for Lindholm though. That price was just too high. As has been pointed out here, the rentals didn't help in the PO and probably actually hurt our performance.

You can question it but the question loses some bite when you're not willing to have paid the price to get the player. The additions definitely didn't help in the PO but I'm not sure they were actively hurting the team. Monahan was a great add during the season as well.

 

[LowLefty]

So are you on the replace Chevy train? My thinking is we need some fresh to identify the gaps.

I'd have no problem moving on from Chevy - he seems to be disconnected on the players we both draft and trade for versus the style of play they are coached to.

 

[Whileee]

I think the Jets thought that they had a good chance of re-signing Monahan, and that might have enhanced his trade value to them (as with Stastny). In the end, either the Jets wouldn't go as high as CBJ or Monahan decided he'd rather be in the US / East.

They saw Toffoli as a pure rental and paid that sort of price.

I don't think either was a particularly good fit. Monahan would have been fine at a lower AAV and term but both he and Toffoli slowed down the Jets' top-9 too much for a very fast team like the Avs.

 

[bumblebeeman]

I think the Jets thought that they had a good chance of re-signing Monahan, and that might have enhanced his trade value to them (as with Stastny). In the end, either the Jets wouldn't go as high as CBJ or Monahan decided he'd rather be in the US / East.

They saw Toffoli as a pure rental and paid that sort of price.

I don't think either was a particularly good fit. Monahan would have been fine at a lower AAV and term but both he and Toffoli slowed down the Jets' top-9 too much for a very fast team like the Avs.

They definitely got exposed against the Avs in particular. It's too bad the playoff format isn't by conference like it used to be. Jets would've been against LA which would've been so much easier

 

[LowLefty]

I think the Jets thought that they had a good chance of re-signing Monahan, and that might have enhanced his trade value to them (as with Stastny). In the end, either the Jets wouldn't go as high as CBJ or Monahan decided he'd rather be in the US / East.

They saw Toffoli as a pure rental and paid that sort of price.

I don't think either was a particularly good fit. Monahan would have been fine at a lower AAV and term but both he and Toffoli slowed down the Jets' top-9 too much for a very fast team like the Avs.

Monahan also had some assets the Jets were looking for - a 2C that would add some stability on the second line, a PP performer (especially around the net) and a center that can win a faceoff. Not disagreeing with his lack of speed - but I don't think they weighed that too heavily in the equation.
That's the problem (risk) when adding - do the pcs fit (with the game style / plan) or is it more about filling in specific needs. I can see why they went after him - and in hindsight, I can see how they misread other impacting factors. Looking for the closest thing to a perfect fit at the deadline is a tough benchmark - but that's the GM's job.

 

[Jet]

So are you on the replace Chevy train? My thinking is we need some fresh to identify the gaps.

I don't know how I feel about this. Chevy has shown to be a masterful negotiator and not prone to do wild things to damage the org long term.

I would be open to making him President of Hockey Ops, be a key in negotiating but have a new GM to give unique input and push him out of his comfort zone a bit.

 

[surixon]

I don't know how I feel about this. Chevy has shown to be a masterful negotiator and not prone to do wild things to damage the org long term.

I would be open to making him President of Hockey Ops, be a key in negotiating but have a new GM to give unique input and push him out of his comfort zone a bit.

For me a fresh set of eyes could mean another assistant GM from outside or even a special advisor to the GM. Just someone in an executive role that hasn't been here for the last decade.

We've run the exact same executive team for over a decade now, I doubt there are any fresh ideas being generated and likely a lot of bias at play.

 

[MelikeJets]

How does asking that question imply "piling up picks and prospects and hoping all of them hit at the same time and we're somehow able to fit all the extensions in under the cap"?

The alternative to TD rentals is not some extreme of hoarding picks and prospects and never trying to win.

I have been against the more expensive TD acquisitions forever. I made an exception this year because it appeared that everything was lining up for us to go for it. It didn't work out. I'm not going to criticize going for it in hindsight now.

That said, I can question the wisdom of the particular rentals we got. I wanted Lindholm, not Monahan. I would not have been in favour of outbidding Canucks for Lindholm though. That price was just too high. As has been pointed out here, the rentals didn't help in the PO and probably actually hurt our performance.

I am also against TD acquisitions but thought this year it was worth a chance. It didn't work out obviously but I won't criticize Chevy for trying. Having said this it sure sucked not having a 1st round draft pick this year so hopefully it doesn't become a habit. Winnipeg needs those picks to survive as a franchise.

 

[Buffdog]

I'm kinda curious about what kind of direction a new GM would take the team

But I'm also worried that it would be a worse direction

Overall, I'd give chevy a grade of B or B+. We could list a few "whoopsies", but you can do that for every GM

He's the epitome of "ready, aim, fire"

Some GMs prefer "fire, ready, aim"

Their audacity to take risks can pay off, but also fail miserably

 

[WolfHouse]

I'm kinda curious about what kind of direction a new GM would take the team

But I'm also worried that it would be a worse direction

Overall, I'd give chevy a grade of B or B+. We could list a few "whoopsies", but you can do that for every GM

He's the epitome of "ready, aim, fire"

Some GMs prefer "fire, ready, aim"

Their audacity to take risks can pay off, but also fail miserably

Chevy is more 'ready, aim, aim... aim some more.... fire'

 

[Cypruss]

Chevy is more 'ready, aim, aim... aim some more.... fire'

Maybe he should go work for the Secret Service?

 

[Flair Hay]

The best way to go about winning to me isn't piling up picks and prospects and hoping all of them hit at the same time and we're somehow able to fit all the extensions in under the cap.

Am I crazy or is this not arguably the best way?

It feels like this is what CHI, LA, and more recently TB did.

Doesn't mean it's easy or that there isn't a lot of luck involved. I think it has been a successful blueprint in the past.

Maybe I'm oversimplifying it.