Speculation: Caps Roster General Discussion (Coaching/FAs/Cap/Lines/etc) | 2024-25 Summer Edition

[Jags]

McMichael has way more value going out and he will bring back a true top 6.

Right, because if McMichael really is no real help in the playoffs, that's something that only WE know. The rest of the league has no clue! Their talent evaluation is bupkis! So of course they'll trade us a mint for him.

Your myopic view of an admittedly flawed player aside, don't you think it's possible given the cap space we have and the likelihood of retention at the TDL, that we can add to this team without subtracting from it? Isn't it better to take two steps forward *without* taking one back?

If your view of McMike is correct, then it isn't a secret and the trade partner would just as likely take another prospect entirely, cuz there'd have to be additional futures in the deal anyway if you're getting back a "true top 6."

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Right, because if McMichael really is no real help in the playoffs, that's something that only WE know. The rest of the league has no clue! Their talent evaluation is bupkis! So of course they'll trade us a mint for him.

Your myopic view of an admittedly flawed player aside, don't you think it's possible given the cap space we have and the likelihood of retention at the TDL, that we can add to this team without subtracting from it? Isn't it better to take two steps forward *without* taking one back?

If your view of McMike is correct, then it isn't a secret and the trade partner would just as likely take another prospect entirely, cuz there'd have to be additional futures in the deal anyway if you're getting back a "true top 6."

You can’t fake devalue CMM to try and make your argument. Even if he has flaws, he’s young….he has value.

He can be correct and CMM can have value at the same time.

 

[DWGie26]

Right, because if McMichael really is no real help in the playoffs, that's something that only WE know. The rest of the league has no clue! Their talent evaluation is bupkis! So of course they'll trade us a mint for him.

Your myopic view of an admittedly flawed player aside, don't you think it's possible given the cap space we have and the likelihood of retention at the TDL, that we can add to this team without subtracting from it? Isn't it better to take two steps forward *without* taking one back?

If your view of McMike is correct, then it isn't a secret and the trade partner would just as likely take another prospect entirely, cuz there'd have to be additional futures in the deal anyway if you're getting back a "true top 6."

You have been around long enough to have seen my myriad of posts, most of which are in support of McMichael. I like McMichael.

I also want to swing for a cup in the next two years. In order to get value back, we are going to have to give up something of value. McMichael is the most valuable piece we have that I’m willing to move.

So sure, my view is probably more slanted towards a GM view that a coaches view. Nothing wrong with either take. But that is why they are different.

 

[wickedwitch]

So the Caps should have a good deal of cap space next season (unless they think they will sign Marner). I wonder how Chychrun would feel about something like a 3x$13 million deal.

You have been around long enough to have seen my myriad of posts, most of which are in support of McMichael. I like McMichael.

I also want to swing for a cup in the next two years. In order to get value back, we are going to have to give up something of value. McMichael is the most valuable piece we have that I’m willing to move.

So sure, my view is probably more slanted towards a GM view that a coaches view. Nothing wrong with either take. But that is why they are different.

I'm not completely opposed to trading CMM, but CMM for who? Because I don't see a player out there that will be available and fits the Caps needs and will be worth more than the Caps' 1st.

(Maybe Anaheim wants to trade Zegras?)

But also, I don't see the Caps trading CMM for locker room reasons -- they don't want to touch the chemistry they have.

So yeah, I'll be shocked if they trade a roster player like CMM this season.

 

[DWGie26]

So the Caps should have a good deal of cap space next season (unless they think they will sign Marner). I wonder how Chychrun would feel about something like a 3x$13 million deal.



I'm not completely opposed to trading CMM, but CMM for who? Because I don't see a player out there that will be available and fits the Caps needs and will be worth more than the Caps' 1st.

(Maybe Anaheim wants to trade Zegras?)

But also, I don't see the Caps trading CMM for locker room reasons -- they don't want to touch the chemistry they have.

So yeah, I'll be shocked if they trade a roster player like CMM this season.

The three players i would do it for in order (because they have this year and next and can be good additions to top 6):

1. Tuck (was two but i like his size so now my top)
2. Bjorkstrand
3. Zegras - I watched the Anaheim game and he was really active and noticeable but small

I’m not trading McMichael for a pending UFA rental.

 

[wickedwitch]

The three players i would do it for in order (because they have this year and next and can be good additions to top 6):

1. Tuck (was two but i like his size so now my top)
2. Bjorkstrand
3. Zegras - I watched the Anaheim game and he was really active and noticeable but small

I’m not trading McMichael for a pending UFA rental.

Tuch isn't getting traded to the Caps for anything short of Leonard (or some other absurd overpay) at the deadline. Tuch was there main piece back in the Eichel trade. If Buffalo doesn't get completely overpaid, there's no reason to trade him now. Buffalo can wait for the offseason when everyone has space for his salary and (if they can't sign him,) create a bidding war.

I'm meh about Bjorkstrand -- I don't think he's worth CMM. But I could be convinced.

 

[Jags]

You can’t fake devalue CMM to try and make your argument. Even if he has flaws, he’s young….he has value.

He can be correct and CMM can have value at the same time.

Okay, then I guess I'm getting tangled up in how he worded it...

Two different positions. Two different values (both in and out). We need Eller for a cup run more than we need McMichael. McMichael has way more value going out and he will bring back a true top 6.

The idea that we need Eller more than we need McMichael paints a picture to me that might not be what he intends; that Eller is better for this team than McMichael.

Following that by saying McMichael has more value speaks directly to what you're saying -- that he's young with another year at a great number, and that has real value. But it's only a great number and that combo only has real value if McMichael's play is also valuable, which just feels contradicted to me by the first statement.

I suppose the first statement could mean that we need an impact 3C more than we need whatever McMichael is giving us today, specifically for the perils of playoff hockey. But specifically Eller? If the TDL rumors are true, Eller is WAY easier to upgrade.

Anyway, my apologies If I'm misunderstanding something here. I just don't see how those two sentences flow together. "We need Eller for a cup run more than we need McMichael," just doesn't compute for me.

@DWGie26, I know you were replying to a silly post comparing the two; that it wasn't you that took the convo there. But I guess I'm just not quite grasping your reply.

 

[Roshi]

I dont like Zegras for now. Risky. He is another reclamation project and I would definately not trade CMM for him right now.

Rather play CMM who has shown steady developement and has 2,1m for next year in the 3C spot than trade him for 5,75 mill for same time period Zegras who is on his second down year.

Id consider seriously Boeser extended for CMM though. Something that gives us dependable 30 goal scorer with contract security. Stylistically Boeser could take over Ovie's spot after next year and his price tag should be comfortably less than O's. But then again, id much rather get it done without CMM being involved.

Still like Tuch, he has good motor. But i dont think he is avaivable. Isnt he playing in his hometown? And doing well with good cap hit. Why would either side want to part there. Ive never quite understood who Bjorkstrand is as a player. Many seem to like him, maybe I have just missed him playing. Just seems as forgottable player for me and biggest reason he is so coveted because the tradeboard is a little underwhelming.

Ive propably turned around and now siding up with its just best to keep McMichael over the field. Trading him for another 50-60 point winger doesnt feel like big enough update to justify the lost cap space and possible ceiling of CMM.

 

[HTFN]

I dont like Zegras for now. Risky. He is another reclamation project and I would definately not trade CMM for him right now.

Rather play CMM who has shown steady developement and has 2,1m for next year in the 3C spot than trade him for 5,75 mill for same time period Zegras who is on his second down year.

Id consider seriously Boeser extended for CMM though. Something that gives us dependable 30 goal scorer with contract security. Stylistically Boeser could take over Ovie's spot after next year and his price tag should be comfortably less than O's. But then again, id much rather get it done without CMM being involved.

Still like Tuch, he has good motor. But i dont think he is avaivable. Isnt he playing in his hometown? And doing well with good cap hit. Why would either side want to part there. Ive never quite understood who Bjorkstrand is as a player. Many seem to like him, maybe I have just missed him playing. Just seems as forgottable player for me and biggest reason he is so coveted because the tradeboard is a little underwhelming.

Ive propably turned around and now siding up with its just best to keep McMichael over the field. Trading him for another 50-60 point winger doesnt feel like big enough update to justify the lost cap space and possible ceiling of CMM.

what the f*** are we doing here? Not directed towards you but you made a good conjunction of points here.

Boeser for McMichael just seems like swapping a commodity that seems capped out for a guy who found significant real estate this year. If we're talking about this guy being an OV replacement we're missing or ignoring how much we handicap the team by accommodating that style of play, and I love the guy to bits... but Ovechkin is not independently a winning player right now.

Great, we trade some proven play and some injury history for a guy figuring his shit out, constantly improving anyway, and with a pedigree for being an intellectual player and not just a guy with wheels or a shot. His player cards over the three years twabby linked indicated that he can be an average 2-way center when asked (by another coach) and also an ~85th percentile scoring forward when asked (by this coach, unless I got the percentile shit wrong which can definitely happen as an idiot)

We've got a guy with tools and motor to do a lot of what the team could reasonably ask except being a true lockdown center, it's only really a matter of how far they develop his potential game before telling him he is what he is.... but are we there already? Anybody who isn't a point per game is already streaky, that's the territory. We saying he's fully cooked? Because we said that last year (me arguably included) and he's shown an extra set of wheels and a way better shot than before.

 

[Roshi]

what the f*** are we doing here? Not directed towards you but you made a good conjunction of points here.

Boeser for McMichael just seems like swapping a commodity that seems capped out for a guy who found significant real estate this year. If we're talking about this guy being an OV replacement we're missing or ignoring how much we handicap the team by accommodating that style of play, and I love the guy to bits... but Ovechkin is not independently a winning player right now.

Great, we trade some proven play and some injury history for a guy figuring his shit out, constantly improving anyway, and with a pedigree for being an intellectual player and not just a guy with wheels or a shot. His player cards over the three years twabby linked indicated that he can be an average 2-way center when asked (by another coach) and also an ~85th percentile scoring forward when asked (by this coach, unless I got the percentile shit wrong which can definitely happen as an idiot)

We've got a guy with tools and motor to do a lot of what the team could reasonably ask except being a true lockdown center, it's only really a matter of how far they develop his potential game before telling him he is what he is.... but are we there already? Anybody who isn't a point per game is already streaky, that's the territory. We saying he's fully cooked? Because we said that last year (me arguably included) and he's shown an extra set of wheels and a way better shot than before.

Well I just said ive jumped back on to "KEEP CMM" camp, but the idea of the process is justified imo. CMM is already good and likely to develope even better, but at the same time he is still raw and has uncertainty on what kind of player he will be next year, while we want to win right away.

To update top6 CMM's spot is the one we are looking at when we eyeball on the tradeboards, and to do so CMM simultaneously has good value for the same reasons we like him. Having CMM as third line would be ideal for us right now, but we also do have Lenny and maybe Cristall on the verge of taking those spots too so that sorts of makes CMM a little bit sacrificable as well - when looking to upgrade top6.

The discussion is not that much about if we like CMM or not, we all do, but whether theres more value in keeping or trading him. Maximizing our assets. And if we can upgrade top6 while keeping CMM, im quite sure everyone here are more than happy to do so.

I know many dont like Boeser. I do. He had some injury concerns before but he has been relatively healthy for (knock on the wood) 3 seasons after this one. And he was legit last year with the 40 goal campaign, before Canucks went all crybabies this year. I see Boeser as a good 30-goal winger whos gone through a lot of adversity and just entered his prime - and can stay there for the next 4-5 years. The comparison on Ovie was just stylistically. Im not suggesting handcuffing us to anything. Boeser is not 39 year old-Ovechkin, as a player, not in good or the bad ways.

 

[HTFN]

Well I just said ive jumped back on to "KEEP CMM" camp, but the idea of the process is justified imo. CMM is already good and likely to develope even better, but at the same time he is still raw and has uncertainty on what kind of player he will be next year, while we want to win right away.

who said? A few posters here? We got romantic about a shot we shouldn't have based on this season's goals and wanting to make Ovechkin somehow more good than he would be anyway?

Before this year we'd have said they had a multi-year progress plan in place, right? It's arguably a real dumbass move to try to scrap significantly developed parts of that project to swing on a win-now "maybe it works" campaign when this team has seen that addition come in and make no noise time and time again.

One season above expectations doesn't change projections, development paths, or contracts. I spent an unfortunate amount of time debating txpd on this exact thing not knowing they were literally seeing things through a different lens a handful of years ago, warning not to sacrifice a planned competitive window of vision for a short term benefit. I feel for what happened but I don't see it much different now.

If this team can add without major losses, fine. If what we're adding requires swapping an important piece of the puzzle what's the f***ing point? This is a house money season and yeah, I love how close they are to showing some real dominance but that doesn't mean anything because we've seen that before. IF you're really that good you can show it in the playoffs too. If you're not, oh well, but it's not worth throwing assets away at this stage of things.

edit: we talk about his potential replacements but why not just... all of them? That's something they can do pretty easily and without a gamble.

 

[Roshi]

who said? A few posters here? We got romantic about a shot we shouldn't have based on this season's goals and wanting to make Ovechkin somehow more good than he would be anyway?

Before this year we'd have said they had a multi-year progress plan in place, right? It's arguably a real dumbass move to try to scrap significantly developed parts of that project to swing on a win-now "maybe it works" campaign when this team has seen that addition come in and make no noise time and time again.

One season above expectations doesn't change projections, development paths, or contracts. I spent an unfortunate amount of time debating txpd on this exact thing not knowing they were literally seeing things through a different lens a handful of years ago, warning not to sacrifice a planned competitive window of vision for a short term benefit. I feel for what happened but I don't see it much different now.

If this team can add without major losses, fine. If what we're adding requires swapping an important piece of the puzzle what's the f***ing point? This is a house money season and yeah, I love how close they are to showing some real dominance but that doesn't mean anything because we've seen that before. IF you're really that good you can show it in the playoffs too. If you're not, oh well, but it's not worth throwing assets away at this stage of things.

edit: we talk about his potential replacements but why not just... all of them? That's something they can do pretty easily and without a gamble.

I totally agree with the multi-year progress and think patience is virtue even now. Sustainable success, dont waste your future for all-in sort of moves, and I dont think many are advocating doing anything to get a quick rush without thinking the cost.

But I also think the progress needs a bit of re-evaluation, as we werent supposed to be here yet. Not only the prospect pool has noticeably elevated with the Hutson, Protas and others completely overperforming their expectations, but the same thing has happened for active roster aswell. We are suddenly in a position where calculated add-ins make sense. As long as it, you know, makes sense.

This is what its all about, you never know what happens next year, but right now we have a good team in our hands. Theres no reason to put handbrake on now just to follow a plan that was impelemented before the team exploded to a world-beating powerhouse. No. Embrace it.

Theres too camps kind of, and I find myself lingering between them. I dont want to "protect the nuts" but I also dont want to "go all-in no matter of what" I also think most of us are in the same page, just about the way we express it out. Internet foruming takes a way the "soft"ness of opinions and wordings become more dramatical than in an everyday discussion.

 

[Empty Goal Net]

Theres too camps kind of, and I find myself lingering between them. I dont want to "protect the nuts" but I also dont want to "go all-in no matter of what" I also think most of us are in the same page, just about the way we express it out. Internet foruming takes a way the "soft"ness of opinions and wordings become more dramatical than in an everyday discussion.

A million likes and agree 1000 percent. It's a fine line and difficult to see that it's sensible to support either extreme (all-in vs. stand-pat). Fine-tuning what's there, anticipating what's most lacking in the current roster to succeed in playoff hockey - that's why mgmt gets paid more than the posters here, at least insofar as managing an NHL team. Luck always factors into the Road to a Cup, but many if not most of us trust the GM, BM, and the others to make the best moves possible without mortgaging the future (sorry, George Allen). It's healthy to debate what those "best moves" are, as long as none of us take things too personally.

 

[Kazer]

I've been a Connor McMichael defender, but the situation is pretty simple to me.

If you have a non-rental upgrade out there, he is tradable. Note that I would much rather trade CMM with another asset or two for a bigger upgrade than trade him for a lateral move/small upgrade. Of the names that have been mentioned most recently (Bjorkstrand, Tuch, Zegras, and Boeser), only Tuch qualifies for me. Zegras is very risky. Bjorkstrand would be a solid add, but I wouldn't give up CMM for him. Finally, Boeser is a rental.

Trading CMM for a pure rental would be bad asset management.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Where’s our Ron Francis-like addition? That’s the dream….

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

 

[JayBeagleFanAccount]

My thoughts aren’t unfounded so yeah, I have a grip.

Two different positions. Two different values (both in and out). We need Eller for a cup run more than we need McMichael. McMichael has way more value going out and he will bring back a true top 6.

eller is a completely useless dime a dozen player that you can get for free on waivers but we decided to trade actual value for him and now sunken cost fallacy forces him to stay in the lineup and handicaps us from making another move.

mcmichael is a young, versatile top 6 scorer (0.183 xgpm, top 3 on the team in EV scoring); hes not where we need to upgrade.

dylan strome is where we need to upgrade, -0.159 xgpm with 4 primary EV assists since thanksgiving is unacceptable and he would be much better in a sheltered role on the 3rd line where is slow pace isnt effecting him as much (and eller would be forced out).

 

[Kazer]

eller is a completely useless dime a dozen player that you can get for free on waivers but we decided to trade actual value for him and now sunken cost fallacy forces him to stay in the lineup and handicaps us from making another move.

mcmichael is a young, versatile top 6 scorer (0.183 xgpm, top 3 on the team in EV scoring); hes not where we need to upgrade.

dylan strome is where we need to upgrade, -0.159 xgpm with 4 primary EV assists since thanksgiving is unacceptable and he would be much better in a sheltered role on the 3rd line where is slow pace isnt effecting him as much (and eller would be forced out).

Strome's xGF% is being dragged down by Ovechkin.

Strome with Ovechkin 45.58 xGF%
Strome without Ovechkin 52.40 xGF%
Ovechkin without Strome 35.59 xGF%
<via naturalstattrick>

So moving him to 3C is a non starter.

Also, I know we mark Eller as the 3C, but it's probably a good time to remind everyone that Eller is the 4C (Dowd plays more overall and more at 5 on 5). And as a 4C, Eller is quite solid. On pace for around 30 points and solid defensively (Eller without Vrana has an xGF% of 51.89%).

I wonder if Carberry will try Duhaime with Eller and Raddysh/Frank at some point prior to the deadline. Might be interesting to see if Dowd can bring a little bit more offense while still being stout defensively.