Player Discussion Christian Dvorak Part 2

[Steve Shutt]

Evans and Dvorak are the same age and both play as bottom 6 C's.
I personally value Evans more, even though Dvorak has better Faceoff ability and career points per game average (.47 vs .37).
If he agreed to the same term 2.85M as Evans but on a shorter deal (2 years) would you extend him? Might be nice asset management if we trade him in the next couple of years, but would take away a spot for Kapanen or Beck who both look ready

 

[Miller Time]

It's unlikely for any 3C to really be the difference between making the playoffs or not.

Depth is a crucial element of surviving the 82 game season... I don't think thats particularly debatable, frankly.

We are looking good for making the playoffs this year, we are adding Demidov and likely doing something with our capspace, on top of the expected growth of guys like Hutson, Guhle, Slafkovsky, etc... Something will have gone seriously wrong if we are wishing we had signed Dvorak.

Has nothing to do with wishing we sign Dvorak... That's an irrelevant strawman.

It's fine not to prefer Dvorak as a player.

That's a different argument than suggesting he isn't a good fit for our bottom 6 next season.

at the right cap/term.
If we don't land a top 6 upgrade

He's a good fit.

And yeah Dvo is better on faceoffs, but the others have things they are better at like skating. I'd also point out that saying they aren't ready to be a reliable full time C ignores the fact that Dvo isn't realiable over a full season either.

Depth matters.
Dvorak would be a more reliable option heading into next season than Beck/Kapanen.

There aren't many other bottom 6 C options out there that would be upgrades without costing considerable assets to acquire and the UFA class will be the priciest ever ... Which Dvo may also seek to maximize, in which case I'd prefer to roll with what we have.

 

[Sorinth]

Depth is a crucial element of surviving the 82 game season... I don't think thats particularly debatable, frankly.



Has nothing to do with wishing we sign Dvorak... That's an irrelevant strawman.

You were the one who claimed Dvorak is critical to making the playoffs next season. So it's entirely relevant to look at our playoff chances without Dvorak.

Claiming depth is what's irrelevant since we have depth with or without him. Bottom-6 C is arguably one of the places we have the most depth in.

It's fine not to prefer Dvorak as a player.

That's a different argument than suggesting he isn't a good fit for our bottom 6 next season.

at the right cap/term.
If we don't land a top 6 upgrade

He's a good fit.



Depth matters.
Dvorak would be a more reliable option heading into next season than Beck/Kapanen.

There aren't many other bottom 6 C options out there that would be upgrades without costing considerable assets to acquire and the UFA class will be the priciest ever ... Which Dvo may also seek to maximize, in which case I'd prefer to roll with what we have.

He's not a good fit because in many ways he's redundant, he brings the same things others do, so we are better off with someone who can bring a different element.

 

[HabzSauce]

This will be his first post season appearance. He's about to go God mode & we are all going to want to re-sign the man just wait

 

[FerrisRox]

It's not about his production.

His role is clear this year, that is a third line shutdown center who feeds his two wingers. Gallagher has been one of the best 5 on 5 goal scorers per TOI this year. He gives his wingers room to play their game and he's been excellent defensively. Had he converted on his many, many chances he'd easily be over 40 points this year.

I've been a big Dvorak critic, but I've liked him quite a bit this year. He's playing the Plekanec/Danault role without the puck.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

 

[Miller Time]

You were the one who claimed Dvorak is critical to making the playoffs next season. So it's entirely relevant to look at our playoff chances without Dvorak.

Lol not at all, again with the strawman.

Or maybe you just misunderstood what you read, or are confusing me for someone else

Either way, I'm not sure what your point is. It's fine to not like a player, just a poor argument to confuse preference with something more than that.

Claiming depth is what's irrelevant since we have depth with or without him. Bottom-6 C is arguably one of the places we have the most depth in.

Well, no. That's factually wrong. We have more depth today with Dvorak than we would tomorrow without him. What a silly argument to make lol

We have Dach, Evans & Newhook as NHL depth at C after Suzuki. Neither Kapanen nor Beck have established themselves as NHL regulars. I'm about as bullish on our prospect group as anyone here, but that doesn't mean creating false narratives to suit an argument.

Replacing effective vets with unproven rookies may well be what we end up with, but that will mean less depth than we had this year, which is not a great recipe for a team looking to improve on its playoff chances.

Last season we relied primarily on internal upgrades via development and the dice roll on Laine.

Difference this year is that Armia, Dvorak and Savard are UFAs. If we don't replace them and rely only on internal progression, we'll have less NHL depth than a year ago. Pretty straightforward.

He's not a good fit because in many ways he's redundant, he brings the same things others do, so we are better off with someone who can bring a different element.

Still disagree. He brings a number of things that neither Dach nor Newhook bring, and unproven rookies are unproven rookies. Odds of either Kapanen or Beck being as good or better than Dvorak next season are low... Not impossible, but low.

And yes, we have both clearly identified that an external upgrade would be ideal, not sure why that needs to keep being repeated

 

[EtLeBut2]

He's been good lately and he's a fairly solid 3C overall but I still want him gone. It might be a short term step back but I still don't trust his current hot form, he's still a loser to me.

 

[Sorinth]

Lol not at all, again with the strawman.

Or maybe you just misunderstood what you read, or are confusing me for someone else

Either way, I'm not sure what your point is. It's fine to not like a player, just a poor argument to confuse preference with something more than that.

Did you or did you not say that if we are focused on being a playoff team we can't use Beck/Kapanen as a Dvorak replacement?

Well, no. That's factually wrong. We have more depth today with Dvorak than we would tomorrow without him. What a silly argument to make lol

We aren't talking about today, we are talking next season.

We have Dach, Evans & Newhook as NHL depth at C after Suzuki. Neither Kapanen nor Beck have established themselves as NHL regulars. I'm about as bullish on our prospect group as anyone here, but that doesn't mean creating false narratives to suit an argument.

Replacing effective vets with unproven rookies may well be what we end up with, but that will mean less depth than we had this year, which is not a great recipe for a team looking to improve on its playoff chances.

Last season we relied primarily on internal upgrades via development and the dice roll on Laine.

Difference this year is that Armia, Dvorak and Savard are UFAs. If we don't replace them and rely only on internal progression, we'll have less NHL depth than a year ago. Pretty straightforward.

If we take this argument literally then you are claiming that replacing an effecctive vet (Armia) with an unproven rookie (Demidov) means less depth and is not a great recipe for a team looking to improve on its playoff chances, right?

Because you are probably the only person in the world who thinks that, it's always about the players in question. If we re-sign everybody execept Dvorak and have Demidov bump Newhook down to 3C we've improved our depth and our playoff odds.

Still disagree. He brings a number of things that neither Dach nor Newhook bring, and unproven rookies are unproven rookies. Odds of either Kapanen or Beck being as good or better than Dvorak next season are low... Not impossible, but low.

What does he bring that Evans doesn't?

And yes, we have both clearly identified that an external upgrade would be ideal, not sure why that needs to keep being repeated

Nobody is talking about an external upgrade so I'm not sure why you feel the need to repeat it and then question it.

 

[Miller Time]

Did you or did you not say that if we are focused on being a playoff team we can't use Beck/Kapanen as a Dvorak replacement?

Yes, if we want to be in a better playoff position going into next season, we need to improve our depth, not decrease it.

Dvorak isn't the specific player that is required.

Not sure why you'd confuse that

We aren't talking about today, we are talking next season.

Yes. In 5 months from now, an NHL roster with
Suzuki - Dach/Newhook - Evans - Dvorak - Beck/Kapanen

Has better NHL C depth than one with
Suzuki - Dach/Newhook - Evans - Beck/Kapanen

Again, not sure why that's confusing or debatable.

If we take this argument literally then you are claiming that replacing an effecctive vet (Armia) with an unproven rookie (Demidov) means less depth and is not a great recipe for a team looking to improve on its playoff chances, right?

No, the equivalent to your analogy would be saying that a team with Demidov & Armia has better depth than one with just Demidov. Pretty straightforward.

Because you are probably the only person in the world who thinks that, it's always about the players in question. If we re-sign everybody execept Dvorak and have Demidov bump Newhook down to 3C we've improved our depth and our playoff odds.

Im not sure what this paragraph even means?

We do have Demidov as a (likely) net add. He's going to most likely help improve our top 9. Wether or not he plays C remains to be seen.

But if you're suggesting that re-signing Pezzetta makes us better off than re-signing Dvorak, I'll politely disagree.

Demidov and Reinbacher are the two rookie additions most likely to improve our roster next year. Imo, it's quite evident that Pezzetta & Savard are the two UFAs least useful to retain.

Dvorak & Armia replaced by Beck/Kapanen doesn't make our NHL roster better come September, and it makes our injury depth considerably worse.

Depth to survive the inevitable injury issues of an 82 game season is crucial, even more so for a team with all its core players 25U.

What does he bring that Evans doesn't?

Shoots Left
Better puck distributor on offense.

Nobody is talking about an external upgrade so I'm not sure why you feel the need to repeat it and then question it.

Just responding to your comment. Perhaps I misunderstood but in several of your replies you allude to upgrading the position and/or adding a "different element" (which I presumed to mean "better element" if net improved roster is the purpose).

I'm only replying to you. Perhaps you're responses to me are based on lumping my replies into other posters comments


In any case, as I said awhile back... Agree to disagree. Dvorak has been excellent in his role with us this year. That it coincides with his first full healthy season in years gives me the confidence that at 29, he's likely to be able to maintain this season's level of play for at least 1-2 years.
We can't replace him internally without both reducing our depth and reducing the immediate quality of our bottom 6 C.

If the goal is for the roster to be better positioned to compete for the playoffs in September than we were last September, replacing the 4 UFA vets with 4 rookies is not a great option. Of the 4, Dvorak & Armia are the best fits to re-sign IF the price/term make sense, and of the two, NHL C depth is the more valuable. Nothing you've offered makes a compelling counter argument so I think we can leave this dead horse alone.

Cheers

 

[shello]

Evans and Dvorak are the same age and both play as bottom 6 C's.
I personally value Evans more, even though Dvorak has better Faceoff ability and career points per game average (.47 vs .37).
If he agreed to the same term 2.85M as Evans but on a shorter deal (2 years) would you extend him? Might be nice asset management if we trade him in the next couple of years, but would take away a spot for Kapanen or Beck who both look ready

I don’t love the idea of keeping him, but at that kind of contract as long as the term is short I’m fine with it. I’d much prefer he gets replaced this off season, but he’s serviceable if not

 

[ahmedou]

CHRISTIAN DVORAK: 11 PTS (5 GOALS/6 ASSISTS) IN HIS LAST 11 GAMES