Around the League 2022-23 season

[Sybil227]

They wouldn't have gotten nearly the return on Dumba as they did for Fiala. Faber is going to be a stud. If he ever decides to sign. Anywhere.

 

[HookKing]

Left his feet for a hit to the head... I don't like that hit at all from Trouba.

View attachment 617102

Didn't happen, that stuff only happens in the AHL.

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

You're taking this way too personally while also attacking my agenda.

I levied a valid criticism of an article that declares a winner when one move is for the future. I don't like the Fiala trade, but that doesn't mean I am incapable of seeing merits in arguments.

Further, I never said nothing about you being a management shill. I said you could pat management on the back for the trade. How is that accusing you of being a shill? If I wanted to accuse you of that, I'd say some dumb shit like "Did you get your paycheck from Blake yet?" or "Keep licking Blake's boots".

Whether Fiala or Dumba is traded, the Wild knew they were going to be worse off as they traded away a roster player as the move was for the future anyway. Thus, having a verdict based off of results 25 games into a season is stupid.

Is that simple enough for you?

Nope, considering you're still claiming that losing Dumba would automatically make them "worse off" (though I notice you're now moving the goalposts from worse defensively to "worse off").

 

[KingsFan7824]

That is shockingly simplistic thinking. Dumba is a net negative defensively. Please show me how it was impossible for the wild to trade Dumba and replace him with a more competent defender.

And to say Fiala continuing to score wasn't guaranteed is borderline disingenuous. He was a .82 PPG player the two seasons prior to last season. At a bare minimum it would be safe to pencil him in for 65-70 points even without accounting for his breakout last season.

But I get that you've hated the Fiala trade from the moment it happened, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

That probably hurts his trade value. Same way that Walker just sucks hurts his.

Could Min add basically the $3m in Fiala's extension to their payroll? If not, he had to be the one to go.

Could they get rid of Dumba's entire hit? Could they retain and keep Fiala? Probably not.

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

That probably hurts his trade value. Same way that Walker just sucks hurts his.

Could Min add basically the $3m in Fiala's extension to their payroll? If not, he had to be the one to go.

Could they get rid of Dumba's entire hit? Could they retain and keep Fiala? Probably not.

Players who are net negatives defensively get traded all the time, even for value. Seth Jones is a pretty good recent example of that.

Fiala is also a net negative defensively yet he somehow fetched a first and good prospect.

 

[funky]

don't personally give two shits about Minnesota and why they had to trade Fiala, just stoked we had the assets to take advantage.

 

[lumbergh]

don't personally give two shits about Minnesota and why they had to trade Fiala, just stoked we had the assets to take advantage.

Goes exactly with Blake's MO on trades. Buy low. Don't wait to the trade deadline to pay through the nose.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Players who are net negatives defensively get traded all the time, even for value. Shocking, I know. Seth Jones is a pretty good recent example of that.

Fiala is also a net negative defensively yet he somehow fetched a first and good prospect. Crazy stuff. It’s almost like your whole routine is make up nebulous hypotheticals to use to argue some specious point…

Maybe Min couldn't get rid of Dumba the same way they got rid of Fiala. For a team with $13m in dead cap, I'm sure they went over every scenario they could to make the cap make sense.

 

[King'sPawn]

Nope, considering you're still claiming that losing Dumba would automatically make them "worse off" (though I notice you're now moving the goalposts from worse defensively to "worse off").

You still can't grasp what's inherently wrong with the article, and in your now apparent crusade to defend the trade, can't argue on the merits alone. And then decided to project the fact you have some agenda onto me.

There are plenty of GOOD articles defending the trade that bring up good points. Heck, I'm sure with you providing the extra metrics of why Dumba would have been the better piece to trade, you could have written a much better one.

But this is an inherently bad article declaring a winner of a trade 25 games into a season when one team made moves for the future. The Wild HAD to trade someone. And their BLUELINE would have been weaker by giving up a bigger roster player. THUS the article writer would have made a declarative statement 25 games in when Minnesota still would have made a move for the future.

I don't know if you're being this aggressively obtuse for a bit or what, but it's getting old f***ing fast.

Edit: I keep changing the language (or in your terms "moving the goalposts") to clarify the faulty narrative I see in the article

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

You still can't grasp what's inherently wrong with the article, and in your now apparent crusade to defend the trade, can't argue on the merits alone. And then decided to project the fact you have some agenda onto me.

There are plenty of GOOD articles defending the trade that bring up good points. Heck, I'm sure with you providing the extra metrics of why Dumba would have been the better piece to trade, you could have written a much better one.

But this is an inherently bad article declaring a winner of a trade 25 games into a season when one team made moves for the future. The Wild HAD to trade someone. And their BLUELINE would have been weaker by giving up a bigger roster player. THUS the article writer would have made a declarative statement 25 games in when Minnesota still would have made a move for the future.

I don't know if you're being this aggressively obtuse for a bit or what, but it's getting old f***ing fast.

Edit: I keep changing the language (or in your terms "moving the goalposts") to clarify the faulty narrative I see in the article

I still don’t see how trading Dumba would have automatically made Minnesota’s blue line worse. It is possible to trade higher paid, productive players and replace that player with internal options who provide the same or greater value at a lower cost. Exhibit A of that is Caleb Addison. His offensive and defensive metrics are better than Dumba’s. As far as I can tell, the Wild do not have an Addison who could have come in at forward to provide the similar production to Fiala at a much lower cost. The whole point is that the Wild, while not having an array of options because of the Suter and Parise buyouts, could have made a trade for the future without hurting their team as much in the present (as they are still trying to be a competitive team).

 

[King'sPawn]

I still don’t see how trading Dumba would have automatically made Minnesota’s blue line worse. It is possible to trade higher paid, productive players and replace that player with internal options who provide the same or greater value at a lower cost. Exhibit A of that is Caleb Addison. His offensive and defensive metrics are better than Dumba’s. As far as I can tell, the Wild do not have an Addison who could have come in at forward to provide the similar production to Fiala at a much lower cost. The whole point is that the Wild, while not having an array of options because of the Suter and Parise buyouts, could have made a trade for the future without hurting their team as much in the present (as they are still trying to be a competitive team).

I think you're focusing on a comment I made about Minnesota's blueline depth being affected more than why I mentioned it in a discussion of what's wrong with the article. But here it goes:

Because it would have affected the depth on the blueline - they would have lost a roster player. Dumba may not be a defensive stalwart, but losing him and trying to dig deeper out of the pool to replace him. It's not a paradigm of Addison vs. Dumba. It's Minnesota's defensive corps (with Addison and Dumba) vs. Minnesota's defensive corps (with Addison only).

Obviously not a direct comparison of talent or skill level, but when the Kings lost Walker and/or Doughty for the season, the depth took a hit. Granted, the Kings were able to recover with their glut of RHD, but unless someone is an albatross of a contract; their presence (or absence) on the roster gets affected by what moves a team can do.

And you make great arguments for why Dumba should have been traded instead. The point is you did. The article didn't.

- The article did not outline Dumba's metrics to argue why he would have been the better trade candidate; just that "Kings won because Fiala's good and the Kings improved their scoring."
- The article really just ignored the quality of pieces Minnesota got back. Will they be as good as Fiala? Maybe, maybe not. Faber's one of my favorite prospects and think he'll be a top-pairing defenseman. But I don't think he'll ever be as sexy a player or as hot a commodity.
- So this raises the question. Did Minnesota opt to trade Fiala because they were more concerned about the return and getting better pieces, and that's why they didn't even bother explore trading Dumba? We don't know. They did no alternative analysis.

I legitimately don't know if the writer's agenda is more geared towards dunking on Minnesota, praising LA, praising Fiala, or something else. However, it has a rather shallow and hasty conclusion for such a major trade. It spent more time answering its own question to boost its word count.

 

[All The Kings Men]

I legitimately don't know if the writer's agenda is ......

It spent more time answering its own question to boost its word count.

I haven't read the offending article but I feel confident in saying that the writers agenda was to produce a finished piece of "content" with the minimal amount of time/energy required to produce it in order to satisfy some sort of quota.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Seems like Min is trying to do all the things at the same time too. Instead of rebuilding with $13/15m in dead cap for 3 of the 4 years Kaprizov is signed for, they're trying to satisfy the current team, while also worrying about the future. They also have an old ass goalie too.

But, what can you do when you have a former player as GM? Even Sakic fell bassackwards into a Cup, but he's considered some genius.

 

[All The Kings Men]

Seems like Min is trying to do all the things at the same time too. Instead of rebuilding with $13/15m in dead cap for 3 of the 4 years Kaprizov is signed for, they're trying to satisfy the current team, while also worrying about the future. They also have an old ass goalie too.

But, what can you do when you have a former player as GM? Even Sakic fell bassackwards into a Cup, but he's considered some genius.

I've been mulling over a thought in my head recently ...

I understand why players and coaches have and maybe even NEED to have a "win now" mentaltiy. Their careers are short and their success is predicated on capitalizing on any opportunity.

Maybe it's not more prevalent than it used to be but it FEELS to me like theres more and more players acting as GM/Pres. Hockey Ops in the league today and I'm not sure that "win now" mentality is helpful in that role and I wonder if the combination of that overall shift in approach combined with limiting factors like the salary cap and an ever expanding league is why we're seeing teams make inexplicable decisions.


Or maybe people have always made dumb mistakes and I'm just trying to find made up patterns in the noise

 

[King'sPawn]

Seems like Min is trying to do all the things at the same time too. Instead of rebuilding with $13/15m in dead cap for 3 of the 4 years Kaprizov is signed for, they're trying to satisfy the current team, while also worrying about the future. They also have an old ass goalie too.

But, what can you do when you have a former player as GM? Even Sakic fell bassackwards into a Cup, but he's considered some genius.

What?

Sakic waited very patiently for a good trade to get rid of Duchene, who wanted out. He was raked over the coals for not dealing him sooner. When he finally did, he got 7 pieces back, which includes:
2019 first round pick (Bowen Byram)
Shane Bowers
Samuel Girard
Vladislav Kamenev

 

[BringTheReign]

Goes exactly with Blake's MO on trades. Buy low. Don't wait to the trade deadline to pay through the nose.

He does have a pretty sterling record on trade returns.

- Durzi, Bjornfot, Grundstrom in the Muzzin deal
- Moore in the Clifford deal
- Arvidsson for the picks we essentially got trading Carter away
- Fiala for a late 1st in a weaker draft plus a player who likely wasn't going to sign*

*I am not the biggest Faber fan, though I can back that he'll likely be a top 4 defenseman

EDIT: I think the only one you could ding him on a bit was not getting enough for Toffoli, but it seemed like the team was pretty high on Madden and it's not like Toff was tearing it up that year.

 

[YP44]

If coaches and players did not have a win now mentality then they would not have made it to the NHL.

 

[YP44]

He does have a pretty sterling record on trade returns.

- Durzi, Bjornfot, Grundstrom in the Muzzin deal
- Moore in the Clifford deal
- Arvidsson for the picks we essentially got trading Carter away
- Fiala for a late 1st in a weaker draft plus a player who likely wasn't going to sign*

*I am not the biggest Faber fan, though I can back that he'll likely be a top 4 defenseman

EDIT: I think the only one you could ding him on a bit was not getting enough for Toffoli, but it seemed like the team was pretty high on Madden and it's not like Toff was tearing it up that year.

Well the second round pick from Toffoli deal was used to move up to get Faber I think...so even then

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Seems like Min is trying to do all the things at the same time too. Instead of rebuilding with $13/15m in dead cap for 3 of the 4 years Kaprizov is signed for, they're trying to satisfy the current team, while also worrying about the future. They also have an old ass goalie too.

But, what can you do when you have a former player as GM? Even Sakic fell bassackwards into a Cup, but he's considered some genius.

Sakic lucked, Lombardi lucked.....

Is there anyone who did not just luck into a Cup?

 

[YP44]

Sakic lucked, Lombardi lucked.....

Is there anyone who did not just luck into a Cup?

I don't understand how Sakic lucked into a cup. There was pressure to change the coach but he said no becasue Roy left him high and dry the coach needed more slack. There was pressure to move Duchene ASAP, he held firm and got his price. Yes he has uber talented players, and I would say getting Makar was a bit of luck. But he still surrounded those guys with the right group.
Kadri was a guy who you could not win with in the playoffs....till they did.
Nichuskin was overated European who could never fit in the NHL....till he did
He moved guys out (Graves) to make room for best players and best fit. he brought guys in that were ideal fits, not just best players.
Seems like more than luck. I will say that most cup winning teams usually have to get lucky when it comes to staying healthy at the right time.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I don't understand how Sakic lucked into a cup. There was pressure to change the coach but he said no becasue Roy left him high and dry the coach needed more slack. There was pressure to move Duchene ASAP, he held firm and got his price. Yes he has uber talented players, and I would say getting Makar was a bit of luck. But he still surrounded those guys with the right group.
Kadri was a guy who you could not win with in the playoffs....till they did.
Nichuskin was overated European who could never fit in the NHL....till he did
He moved guys out (Graves) to make room for best players and best fit. he brought guys in that were ideal fits, not just best players.
Seems like more than luck. I will say that most cup winning teams usually have to get lucky when it comes to staying healthy at the right time.

Everyone LUCKS into winning a cup......there is no winning team that didn't have luck that propelled them, even our two cup wins.....there's elements of luck.....

The difference between the winners.....and losers.....is more about being in the right place to take advantage of an opportunity......a Kadri, a Tkachuk, a Debrincat, a Fiala more recently, etc, that's about being prepared etc, Blake has shown glimpses of that.......take a look around, how many teams are able to take advantage of an opportunity presenting itself, whether or not it's cap space, picks, prospects, or players....

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

 

[Statto]

He does have a pretty sterling record on trade returns.

- Durzi, Bjornfot, Grundstrom in the Muzzin deal
- Moore in the Clifford deal
- Arvidsson for the picks we essentially got trading Carter away
- Fiala for a late 1st in a weaker draft plus a player who likely wasn't going to sign*

*I am not the biggest Faber fan, though I can back that he'll likely be a top 4 defenseman

EDIT: I think the only one you could ding him on a bit was not getting enough for Toffoli, but it seemed like the team was pretty high on Madden and it's not like Toff was tearing it up that year.

I think that’s fair. Toffoli desperately needed a change of scene, I don’t think he was going to bounce back here.

 

[Brodeur]

He moved guys out (Graves) to make room for best players and best fit. he brought guys in that were ideal fits, not just best players.

As I understand it, Graves was an expansion draft move. Colorado used its protection spots on Makar-Girard-Toews. Maybe he would have been a cap casualty (3.16 mil), but they did sign Ryan Murray (2 mil) as a replacement.

 

[YP44]

As I understand it, Graves was an expansion draft move. Colorado used its protection spots on Makar-Girard-Toews. Maybe he would have been a cap casualty (3.16 mil), but they did sign Ryan Murray (2 mil) as a replacement.

Still smart to move him before losing for nothing.
At the time I wanted to deal Muzzin so we could protect McNabb.