Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Armchair GM Thread

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Yeah, I mean this is not a great trade by any means but I don't get the overwhelming hate for it either.

Novak at 3.5 was never going to fetch you anything significant. Schenn's obviously a cap dump at this point or at maximum has value of a 4th or a 5th rounder.

I like Bunting as a player and while I think skating-wise we're again going into the wrong direction, I think he can be a more useful piece for us than Novak. Novak showed last year in the playoffs how soft he truly is. Bunting is tougher to play against and more physical, too.

I don't love the fact, however, that Bunting's already injured when we get him. Hopefully, it's something he can come back from 100%.

The thing - again - with this trade is the complete disaster of a player development. And I believe that's the reason most people are hating on this trade. Novak was almost a PPG when he first came in but has dropped off every year since - resulting him being near a cap dump in value. Whereas with a proper player development scheme, a 50-60 point low-end 2C would've been a realistic scenario for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hockey diva, weeze, Kat Predator and 1 other person
Scoresberg said:
Yeah, I mean this is not a great trade by any means but I don't get the overwhelming hate for it either.

Novak at 3.5 was never going to fetch you anything significant. Schenn's obviously a cap dump at this point or at maximum has value of a 4th or a 5th rounder.

I like Bunting as a player and while I think skating-wise we're again going into the wrong direction, I think he can be a more useful piece for us than Novak. Novak showed last year in the playoffs how soft he truly is. Bunting is tougher to play against and more physical, too.

I don't love the fact, however, that Bunting's already injured when we get him. Hopefully, it's something he can come back from 100%.

The thing - again - with this trade is the complete disaster of a player development. And I believe that's the reason most people are hating on this trade. Novak was almost a PPG when he first came in but has dropped off every year since - resulting him being near a cap dump in value. Whereas with a proper player development scheme, a 50-60 point low-end 2C would've been a realistic scenario for him.
Click to expand...
Appendix surgery
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scoresberg
Scoresberg said:
Yeah, I mean this is not a great trade by any means but I don't get the overwhelming hate for it either.

Novak at 3.5 was never going to fetch you anything significant. Schenn's obviously a cap dump at this point or at maximum has value of a 4th or a 5th rounder.

I like Bunting as a player and while I think skating-wise we're again going into the wrong direction, I think he can be a more useful piece for us than Novak. Novak showed last year in the playoffs how soft he truly is. Bunting is tougher to play against and more physical, too.

I don't love the fact, however, that Bunting's already injured when we get him. Hopefully, it's something he can come back from 100%.

The thing - again - with this trade is the complete disaster of a player development. And I believe that's the reason most people are hating on this trade. Novak was almost a PPG when he first came in but has dropped off every year since - resulting him being near a cap dump in value. Whereas with a proper player development scheme, a 50-60 point low-end 2C would've been a realistic scenario for him.
Click to expand...
Completely agree. Add that we got a 4th for Schenn which I think we were mostly hoping for.
 
AtlantaWhaler said:
One reason may be playing style. Bunting is more of a net crasher which we currently have none of.

Overall, I do agree that Barry's lack of initial planning (Bruno, Carrier contract, not trading Novak last year....) is crushing this team. I guess after the Fabbro fail and keeping this idiot coach around, I'm saying that this trade shouldn't be the focus of our anger as it really wasn't that bad at all. It's the other fumbles.....
Click to expand...
I think this trade is actually a good focusing point for our ire. Just because of what it says about Trotz's thinking. He's making a move that:

a) supports his coach's player/style preference - and we know the coach is brutal
b) brings in another 30-year old player whose purpose is to help the team NEXT SEASON - presumably to contribute to whatever fantasy turnaround he is prioritizing.

I don't think it's a trade where you just say, eh, Bunting is just a different style from Novak and Schenn sucked, so therefore the trade is fine. It's what the trade says about Trotz's bigger picture thinking/planning. It's indicative that he's not recognizing the hole he has dug for the franchise, the problem he has behind the bench.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viqsi, Armourboy, Predsanddead24 and 6 others
AtlantaWhaler said:
One reason may be playing style. Bunting is more of a net crasher which we currently have none of.

Overall, I do agree that Barry's lack of initial planning (Bruno, Carrier contract, not trading Novak last year....) is crushing this team. I guess after the Fabbro fail and keeping this idiot coach around, I'm saying that this trade shouldn't be the focus of our anger as it really wasn't that bad at all. It's the other fumbles.....
Click to expand...
Alot of Buntings production this year has been off the powerplay. 9G 6A 15P on the powerplay and 5G 9A 14P at 5v5.

Novak has 12G 5A 17P at 5v5 and 1G 4A 5P on the PP.

Bunting got to play with Malkin, Rakell, Rust, Glass, etc. Novak got to play with Evangelista, Jankowski, and occasionally Stamkos, Forsberg.

Cap management wise is fairly neutral. We shift 2 contracts and technically gain a little capspace but backfilling for Schenn eats up most of it. Gain 1.75 million prior to backfilling for schenn so maybe a net gain of 750K or so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AtlantaWhaler
Porter Stoutheart said:
I think this trade is actually a good focusing point for our ire. Just because of what it says about Trotz's thinking. He's making a move that:

a) supports his coach's player/style preference - and we know the coach is brutal
b) brings in another 30-year old player whose purpose is to help the team NEXT SEASON - presumably to contribute to whatever fantasy turnaround he is prioritizing.

I don't think it's a trade where you just say, eh, Bunting is just a different style from Novak and Schenn sucked, so therefore the trade is fine. It's what the trade says about Trotz's bigger picture thinking/planning. It's indicative that he's not recognizing the hole he has dug for the franchise, the problem he has behind the bench.
Click to expand...
Agreed. If this is the end destination of this trade sequence, it says to me our GM is delusional about the current circumstances of this team.

Still time to figure things out and change directions but we really dont have the parts to be competitive next season. 5 of the top 6 all over 30: Forsberg, Stamkos, Marchessault, Bunting, RoR with 3 being over 35 next year.

Josi coming off another injury. Josi and Skjei being the only high end dmen. 2nd pairing Blankenburg. The return of Lauzon. The rest being a mess of unproven talent of varying ability.

Saros being subpar in 2 consecutive seasons.

Just nothing to get my hopes up after this season. No real reason to expect next season to be better if we keep the same crew and coach.

Hopefully, this is step 1 of a long chain
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigFatCat999, Porter Stoutheart, Kat Predator and 1 other person
Porter Stoutheart said:
I think this trade is actually a good focusing point for our ire. Just because of what it says about Trotz's thinking. He's making a move that:

a) supports his coach's player/style preference - and we know the coach is brutal
b) brings in another 30-year old player whose purpose is to help the team NEXT SEASON - presumably to contribute to whatever fantasy turnaround he is prioritizing.

I don't think it's a trade where you just say, eh, Bunting is just a different style from Novak and Schenn sucked, so therefore the trade is fine. It's what the trade says about Trotz's bigger picture thinking/planning. It's indicative that he's not recognizing the hole he has dug for the franchise, the problem he has behind the bench.
Click to expand...
This right here. I know gms lie but I don't believe anything that come out of trotz's mouth anymore. He says one thing and does another. He has no plan. This team is bad and this trade only proves that he's still trying to rearrange seats on a sinking ship. If he doesn't sell orielly then I'd put money down that he's gonna bring in another overpriced 30 plus year old to try to get back to the mushy middle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Preds Partisan and Porter Stoutheart
herzausstein said:
Idk... he's the one i figured we would grab. Maybe they have a rule about only being able to grab so many at once

Reaves on waivers today. Time for more hard to play against grit
Click to expand...
I don't believe we'd claim Reaves since he has term left?

Well, Oesterle does too, but that's a 2-way contract, so worst case he could head to Milwaukee next year. But since Fischer is also an impending UFA, I really thought he'd fit right in with our group. Moreso than Vrana who is skilled, but a bit of a Novak/Tomasino type?

Anyway, I see all of Svechkov, L'Heureux, Lucchini, Stastney, and Del Gaizo who I'd want to see in Milwaukee tomorrow. Ideally Evangelista too, but I don't see that happening. So the more lukewarm bodies they can grab on waivers, the better.

I guess it's less likely that there will be bodies on waivers after the TDL if the roster size limit comes off, though. The recent wave of waivings was teams making sure they had room prior to the TDL.
 
Porter Stoutheart said:
I don't believe we'd claim Reaves since he has term left?

Well, Oesterle does too, but that's a 2-way contract, so worst case he could head to Milwaukee next year. But since Fischer is also an impending UFA, I really thought he'd fit right in with our group. Moreso than Vrana who is skilled, but a bit of a Novak/Tomasino type?

Anyway, I see all of Svechkov, L'Heureux, Lucchini, Stastney, and Del Gaizo who I'd want to see in Milwaukee tomorrow. Ideally Evangelista too, but I don't see that happening. So the more lukewarm bodies they can grab on waivers, the better.

I guess it's less likely that there will be bodies on waivers after the TDL if the roster size limit comes off, though. The recent wave of waivings was teams making sure they had room prior to the TDL.
Click to expand...
We can also grab some warm bodies through trades. Reaves would kindof replace McCarron's toughness and let sissons or anyone else really center the 4th line. McCarron and reaves have similar caphits and contract lengths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Porter Stoutheart
AtlantaWhaler said:
Novak for a 1st? Can't imagine we'd get that for a 30ish point forward with another couple years at $3.5...but I guess you never know. I'm not saying it's a great trade, I'm just saying it's not terrible either. It's just confusing as far as what the desired outcome is. It would be great for Barry to have a presser to discuss what we're hoping to accomplish. Opening up spots for youth? Who knows.
Click to expand...
Feels like there is context missing if there's legs to that on Novak. I'm very skeptical, even if the source is usually solid, that anyone valued him at a 1st. Maybe it was earlier on last season, maybe there were more pieces involved, maybe this was the talk but the offer wasn't concrete. And obviously the team and his perceived role was different last year at varying stages. Would have been great, if true, and I don't think Barry's managed assets well, but that was clearly not remotely his value now, so it is what it is.
 
Bringer of Jollity said:
Feels like there is context missing if there's legs to that on Novak. I'm very skeptical, even if the source is usually solid, that anyone valued him at a 1st. Maybe it was earlier on last season, maybe there were more pieces involved, maybe this was the talk but the offer wasn't concrete. And obviously the team and his perceived role was different last year at varying stages. Would have been great, if true, and I don't think Barry's managed assets well, but that was clearly not remotely his value now, so it is what it is.
Click to expand...
He already said this was at the TDL last year. (Or some time just before it.) i.e. when Novak was coming off 43 pts in 51 games and on his way to 45 in 71. For $800k. That at the time was a massive Cap bargain at a time when teams were hard up against the Cap. I can remember everybody on the Trade board constantly asking about Novak. He was being seen as some kind of "hidden gem" at a totally dirt cheap Cap hit.

The talk of a 1st does not seem outlandish, I suspect we talked about the very thing here at the time... and probably said, "nah, we need to keep Novak even if somebody offered a 1st." :help:
 
After further consideration: Bunting probably has decent value next season if he produces and we still suck like i expect. We will also have retention slots. I dont think Bunting does anything for us by himself and we are basically right to where we were with Nyquist on the roster (if not worse now that we also dont have Novak).
 
herzausstein said:
After further consideration: Bunting probably has decent value next season if he produces and we still suck like i expect. We will also have retention slots. I dont think Bunting does anything for us by himself and we are basically right to where we were with Nyquist on the roster (if not worse now that we also dont have Novak).
Click to expand...
If Nyquist can get us a 2nd, so can Bunting, sure. Barring unforseen injury/calamity. Although a lot of people don't seem to like Bunting, I guess just for his irascible on-ice personality? So he doesn't bring the 2-way/lockerroom intangibles/whatever value that Nyquist might. Anyway, we'll see.

Getting a 2nd+4th for Novak and Schenn is still pretty bad IMO. We could have had a 1st for Novak last year, and should have been able to hoodwink somebody into giving us a 2nd for Schenn. But it's still all backasswards if we're trading players for draft picks at the TDL at all, really. :help:
 
Porter Stoutheart said:
If Nyquist can get us a 2nd, so can Bunting, sure. Barring unforseen injury/calamity. Although a lot of people don't seem to like Bunting, I guess just for his irascible on-ice personality? So he doesn't bring the 2-way/lockerroom intangibles/whatever value that Nyquist might. Anyway, we'll see.

Getting a 2nd+4th for Novak and Schenn is still pretty bad IMO. We could have had a 1st for Novak last year, and should have been able to hoodwink somebody into giving us a 2nd for Schenn. But it's still all backasswards if we're trading players for draft picks at the TDL at all, really. :help:
Click to expand...
We held onto Novak too long. Just like we did Carrier, Tomasino, and Fabbro. Judging by on ice time, tomasino, Fabbro, and Novak werent really in Brunos game plan. Carrier being the exception but that was just a dumb extension in my book
 
  • Like
Reactions: Porter Stoutheart
herzausstein said:
We held onto Novak too long. Just like we did Carrier, Tomasino, and Fabbro. Judging by on ice time, tomasino, Fabbro, and Novak werent really in Brunos game plan. Carrier being the exception but that was just a dumb extension in my book
Click to expand...
Yep, the organization needs to decide sooner if it doesn't like a guy. Cut bait at peak value, don't pound guys into the ground and then trade them when their value has cratered!

Or before that... just don't bother drafting guys with high picks if you don't like them? I mean, you don't always know how a guy is going to ultimately pan out. But it sure feels like sometimes these guys are just turning out exactly as one might have expected from when they were 18? Tomasino and Fabbro were pretty much par for what we ought to have hoped for? If you aren't going to like them, don't draft them in the first place? :dunno:
 
  • Like
Reactions: herzausstein and Soundgarden
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom