All Purpose Trade / Roster Building Thread pt 8- wait we're spending HOW MUCH?

[My Special Purpose]

Well we got our "Matthews" locked in at $8.5m per (Aho) compared to $11.6m for Toronto, we got our "Nylander" locked in at $5.4m (Teravainen) compared to $6.9m for Toronto, and our "Marner" (Svech) is 2 years away from payday. That's already $4.6m less than our group of studs. Let's say we did trade for Laine, and he came in at $9.5m. That's another $1.5m less than Tavares, for a total of $6.1m less as a group.

Matthews minus Aho = $3.1m
Nylander minus TT = $1.5m
Tavares minus Laine = $1.5m
Marner minus Svech = ??? (let's call it a wash, knowing full well that if it is actually a wash, Svech is probably a 40 goal scorer)

Total: $6.1m (or 8% of the cap)

Now I don't really want Laine for other reasons (I think him and RBA would clash so badly), but comparing our potential situation to Toronto is to ignore what Toronto did to put themselves in this position (talking to the media about keeping all 4, overpaying everyone ever so slightly, etc.) It also ignores what we've done very well - getting good value on our deals. No point in having those excellent deals if you aren't leveraging them to have room for great talent.

To note: I fully recognize your caution regarding committing too much to high end talent and leaving yourself with little flexibility; I agree with the point and it's something to consistently keep an eye on. But because we've done so well with our contract values, we are for that very reason decidedly not in the same situation Toronto is in if we choose to add another high-end talent.

I think we *are* doing this by adding Haula and Dzingel on short-term deals. The problem comes when Laine is on the back-half of an eight-year deal and Aho, Pesce and Teravainen all need new deals.

In the meantime, I have no problems spending the savings on shorter-term deals for UFAs, but a long-term big ticket only kicks the can down the road.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

I think we *are* doing this by adding Haula and Dzingel on short-term deals. The problem comes when Laine is on the back-half of an eight-year deal and Aho, Pesce and Teravainen all need new deals.

In the meantime, I have no problems spending the savings on shorter-term deals for UFAs, but a long-term big ticket only kicks the can down the road.

Even better than short-term UFA signings, IMO, is more Marleaus and high draft picks, the whole idea being that our scouts are capable of finding another superstar in 5 years so that one of the Big 3 (Aho, Pesce, TT) can be either traded or let go with not much consequence to our long-term future.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

I think we *are* doing this by adding Haula and Dzingel on short-term deals. The problem comes when Laine is on the back-half of an eight-year deal and Aho, Pesce and Teravainen all need new deals.

In the meantime, I have no problems spending the savings on shorter-term deals for UFAs, but a long-term big ticket only kicks the can down the road.

Well, if 5 years from now Laine, Teravainen, Aho, and Svech are all elite level players worth keeping around and paying big money, we will likely have plenty of money lying around to keep things going.

Agreed that we can also use that savings on guys like Haula and Dzingel - but neither pack the punch of an elite player. They are great uses of the cap space in the meantime however.

Our big ticket expenses are much more in line with Tampa’s than Toronto’s. Tampa’s using the model of replacing depth from within, which works when you draft as well as they have. This goes back to our “diminishing returns” discussion from a few days ago. The other thing the organizational depth does is let you replace a guy like Dzingel with a guy like Mattheos or Luostarinen in two years instead of shelling out $4.5m to keep him around.


We’re talking about a team that has a megatron of Patrick Marleau and Alex Semin as its highest paid player. Unlike a Toronto, we’ve got Dzingel, Haula, McGinn, Martinook, Hamilton, Faulk, van Riemsdyk, Reimer, Mrazek, Semin, and Marleau all potentially coming off the books before Svech needs a deal. And Svech, while we all love him, is far from a sure thing when it comes to needing a $10m+ deal. If we can add a Laine (or, preferably but unlikely, a Point or Rantanen or etc), and get him signed for reasonable deal, it’d be a good move and wouldn’t take up an unreasonable amount of flexibility. It’d have to be the right move, but definitely not dismissing it out of hand.

If you’re concerned about Aho, TT, and Pesce needing new deals, let’s just sign Laine for 5 years and walk him to UFA too. Aho and TT are locked in, known commodities. Svech isn’t, but if he ends up commanding $13m I will take having to solve that “problem” any day. At the dollar amounts we’re talking here, we’re far from having a flexibility issue.

 

[DaveG]

We've got a nicely balanced team that's cost-controlled, young, and full of players that are likely to improve over the next few years.

Laine will be a great player for somebody, but it don't think it will, or should, be us.

The one way I think we could end up with him is if he takes a bridge and then goes with arbitration after. With the next tv contact likely to go up significantly that could play a role in the cap allowing a Finnsync reunion tour right around the time he hits free agency. But unless he wants to make a point of playing with his buddy Seabass I can't see any other way he ends up here.

 

[Chrispy]

The one way I think we could end up with him is if he takes a bridge and then goes with arbitration after. With the next tv contact likely to go up significantly that could play a role in the cap allowing a Finnsync reunion tour right around the time he hits free agency. But unless he wants to make a point of playing with his buddy Seabass I can't see any other way he ends up here.

The issue I see with a bridge is that Laine is already complaining that he's not playing with the top line talent. If that continues, a bridge is a bad gamble for him. Can he trust an "assurance" he will play with the top line players? Or is he going to try to get his big contract now (at least up to UFA) and set aside the risk Maurice will shuffle him back down the lineup?

 

[tarheelhockey]

I agree - but not on the principle that we shouldn't add another stud, high talent player because it would cost too much.

I agree because I think if we can do that one more time, making that bet on Laine might not be the best option.

This is pretty much where I am with it. I don't love Laine as a player and I see him as a Skinner-like presence whose raw scoring stats seem to automatically assign him a top-tier player status when his actual contribution to a winning team is a half-step below that.

That being said, players like Laine and Skinner don't fall off of trees. You have to at least give strong consideration to picking one up when he's available, especially if there's a clear niche for him to occupy on the roster.

 

[My Special Purpose]

Our big ticket expenses are much more in line with Tampa’s than Toronto’s. Tampa’s using the model of replacing depth from within, which works when you draft as well as they have. This goes back to our “diminishing returns” discussion from a few days ago. The other thing the organizational depth does is let you replace a guy like Dzingel with a guy like Mattheos or Luostarinen in two years instead of shelling out $4.5m to keep him around.

Of note, Tampa Bay's farm system was ranked No. 30 by Pronman last season, and No. 23 this season (based almost-entirely on the meteoric rise of Alex Barre-Boulet from undrafted free agent to top NHL prospect). We're probably 2-3 years of development behind them in terms of NHL talent. I'll be very interested to see if we can keep up our "top five prospect pool" ranking after two years of competing to go deep in the playoffs.

 

[DaveG]

Of note, Tampa Bay's farm system was ranked No. 30 by Pronman last season, and No. 23 this season (based almost-entirely on the meteoric rise of Alex Barre-Boulet from undrafted free agent to top NHL prospect). We're probably 2-3 years of development behind them in terms of NHL talent. I'll be very interested to see if we can keep up our "top five prospect pool" ranking after two years of competing to go deep in the playoffs.

Hell I'll be happy with top half of the league in 3 years or so. As long as it's not mostly the same guys it is now aside from 2019s and maybe one or two 2018s on the list.

 

[NotOpie]

I think the 2020 draft will define our system for quite some time. We have a lot of boom or bust guys from this year's draft. Guys like:

Honka
Tieksola
Fensore
Wall
Murray

....are all gambles, but the upside is pretty significant.

Next season we have 6 picks in the Top 100 again. Assuming 1/2 of these guys eventually graduate to the AHL (along with the "surer things", Suzuki, Rees, Puistola, etc.), we're likely 4 or 5 years to the good on prospects. Then, just average to good drafting going forward and we should maintain a very solid system.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Of note, Tampa Bay's farm system was ranked No. 30 by Pronman last season, and No. 23 this season (based almost-entirely on the meteoric rise of Alex Barre-Boulet from undrafted free agent to top NHL prospect). We're probably 2-3 years of development behind them in terms of NHL talent. I'll be very interested to see if we can keep up our "top five prospect pool" ranking after two years of competing to go deep in the playoffs.

If we do we're an upper echelon team for at least 5 years. That's a tough double play to pull off. That said, if we truly did "hit" this year in the draft the way everyone said we did, all of the guys we drafted will be turning 20 in two years, still eligible for the list without being busts. We also have 2 picks in each of the first 3 rounds next year and expect to be a playoff team, so maybe a few more years of drafting success are ahead of us. Tampa also just started selling off pieces for 1st round picks (JT Miller), something we've discussed doing with our logjam. I think we are also at least a year or two away from being true buyers at the deadline, and something tells me this front office doesn't love the notion of trading 1st round picks for rentals anyway.

Honestly if any front office can do it it's this one. I'm so so excited about the future of this team.

 

[spockBokk]

https://www.newsobserver.com/sports...rticle234223387.html#storylink=mainstage_lead

What does the team look like with Williams?

37-20-86
21-11-14
18-56-88
13-71-23/48

23/48 as the 13th?

Without?

37-20-18
21-11-86
13-56-88
23-71-48

Checker = 13th fwd?

I’m thinking the longer it drags on, the less likely he’s playing.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Is he gonna Niedermayer us and come back in December fresh for a stretch run?

 

[Aurinko]

Well, if 5 years from now Laine, Teravainen, Aho, and Svech are all elite level players worth keeping around and paying big money, we will likely have plenty of money lying around to keep things going.

Agreed that we can also use that savings on guys like Haula and Dzingel - but neither pack the punch of an elite player. They are great uses of the cap space in the meantime however.

Our big ticket expenses are much more in line with Tampa’s than Toronto’s. Tampa’s using the model of replacing depth from within, which works when you draft as well as they have. This goes back to our “diminishing returns” discussion from a few days ago. The other thing the organizational depth does is let you replace a guy like Dzingel with a guy like Mattheos or Luostarinen in two years instead of shelling out $4.5m to keep him around.


We’re talking about a team that has a megatron of Patrick Marleau and Alex Semin as its highest paid player. Unlike a Toronto, we’ve got Dzingel, Haula, McGinn, Martinook, Hamilton, Faulk, van Riemsdyk, Reimer, Mrazek, Semin, and Marleau all potentially coming off the books before Svech needs a deal. And Svech, while we all love him, is far from a sure thing when it comes to needing a $10m+ deal. If we can add a Laine (or, preferably but unlikely, a Point or Rantanen or etc), and get him signed for reasonable deal, it’d be a good move and wouldn’t take up an unreasonable amount of flexibility. It’d have to be the right move, but definitely not dismissing it out of hand.

If you’re concerned about Aho, TT, and Pesce needing new deals, let’s just sign Laine for 5 years and walk him to UFA too. Aho and TT are locked in, known commodities. Svech isn’t, but if he ends up commanding $13m I will take having to solve that “problem” any day. At the dollar amounts we’re talking here, we’re far from having a flexibility issue.

Canes were a fast team with tons of scoring chances. Haula is the fastest guy in the team. Even with the injury and some age, no questions asked. He will be a perfect fit for the style of hockey that Canes have played. He will score 20+, including some really sweet ones, while playing a team first defensive game. At 2,75M$, he is extremely high value trade considering the situation.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Canes were a fast team with tons of scoring chances. Haula is the fastest guy in the team. Even with the injury and some age, no questions asked. He will be a perfect fit for the style of hockey that Canes have played. He will score 20+, including some really sweet ones, while playing a team first defensive game. At 2,75M$, he is extremely high value trade considering the situation.

No real argument here, given my post was about an entirely different topic

 

[spockBokk]

Brian Boyle?



Meh...aren’t there enough forwards already, even without Williams? I guess he’d provide grit and leadership, but I’d rather they just re-sign Saku or promote a Checker and then let a new leader emerge.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Brian Boyle?



Meh...aren’t there enough forwards already, even without Williams?

I mean, he had 18 goals between NJ and Nashville last year, and he's got that Veteran Presence. So if he's the 4th liner vet, I think it's fine. We need a little gray hair. Would prefer that it be Williams, but it is what it is.

 

[spockBokk]

I mean, he had 18 goals between NJ and Nashville last year, and he's got that Veteran Presence. So if he's the 4th liner vet, I think it's fine. We need a little gray hair. Would prefer that it be Williams, but it is what it is.

Seems like he’d be a better trade deadline addition than before camp addition, in my view at least. If Williams doesn’t come back , which seems likely at this point, I was hoping they’d fill that spot from within.

I’m not completely against adding a vet, but how many 4th line/bottom guys do they need(from top to bottom):

13-71-48
23-56-88
37-11-86
18-20-21

(I needed to do that to visualize the guys I think will be on the roster...)

I guess Boyle would look good as a 13th, would he be willing to be that guy? Would RBA sit one of Necas/McGinn/Foegele/Martinook in favor or Boyle? I guess there’s that sane issue if Williams comes back too.

If no Willy, I’d say Necas would really have to shit the bed in camp to not make the team. He’d be the only right shot. I think he’s on the team regardless of Willy though.

 

[My Special Purpose]

Boyle would be a nice fallback position from Williams, IMO. I get the depth thing in the system, but we really can't go into the season with an average age under 25. I'm really concerned about the lack of natural leadership without Williams, and Boyle would be a great answer. Anybody know his opinion on the Storm Surge?

 

[A Star is Burns]

Yeah, I'm still hoping for Williams, but Boyle would be plenty solid for a backup plan if that came to be. It'd be a solid move for a team we think can contend. Young guys will get the chance if they force it. One way or another room can be made.

 

[AD Skinner]

My wife would be more interested in the hurricanes than ever before if Brian Boyle became one. Not sure how I feel about that idea

 

[Lempo]

My wife would be more interested in the hurricanes than ever before if Brian Boyle became one. Not sure how I feel about that idea

Brian Boyle would bring added scoring touch.

 

[TheReelChuckFletcher]

Brian Boyle is still a good player, so if JWilly decides to hang it up early, I think that he would be excellent as a veteran presence as well as someone that can give our 4th line some extra offensive pop. Added toughness bonus is how he came back to playing NHL-level hockey after fighting cancer.

 

[DaveG]

I'd have no issue with bringing in Boyle should Williams decide to hang them up. The guy can still produce and he's a well above league average 4th liner. We'd be counting on Necas to take the next step instead of having Williams as a fallback, but I'm ok with that.

 

[AD Skinner]

"Hey honey I was just reading the canes might sign Brian boyle"
"My boyfriend?"

But for real though hed be a good add even if Williams does come back. Itd be crowded but plenty of depth in case of injury/slumps. Boyle may not put up the points Williams does but teams with him on them havent missed the playoffs since 10-11.

 

[MinJaBen]

Boyle may not put up the points Williams does but teams with him on them havent missed the playoffs since 10-11.

Isn’t that because he’s always traded to a team in the playoffs at the deadline? The Devils didn’t seem to do so good last year when they had him.