Devils discussion (news, notes and speculation) - part III

[devilsblood]

Really with Timo moving to the 3rd line, I think a LW for Nico is now the move.

 

[Devil X]

But Nico does not need replacing. He's excellent on faceoffs and he's tied for the team lead in PP goals.

Would Miller be an improvement? I don't know, not even sure where he plays on the PP in Van, but I doubt he'd be such an improvement that I would move the team captain off the top PP.

And Nico plays tough enough defensive minutes already, if anything I'd like to lighten his load in that regard. And defensive centers are cheaper anyways.

He won’t move Nico he would improve the 2nd PP and add massive punch to a 3d line. Miller isn’t coming here to be the top guy he’s coming here to be the 5th guy and create an insane Center depth.

Find a team that would have better Center depth than Nico Jack Miller with our Defense.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

the 1st PP plays like 75% of the PP. I am not all that concerned with improving the 2nd PP.

of course the center depth would be insane with Miller, but he isn't going to be free and his contract is bad. There are many levels to these things.

 

[devilsblood]

He won’t move Nico he would improve the 2nd PP and add massive punch to a 3d line. Miller isn’t coming here to be the top guy he’s coming here to be the 5th guy and create an insane Center depth.

Find a team that would have better Center depth than Nico Jack Miller with our Defense.

2nd unit PP's are not significant factors. Definitely not why you would acquire a player.

He would be a big improvement for the 3rd line, but he'd be expensive to acquire, has a big contract, and has baggage,

If we really want to add a center defensive guys like Gourde or Evans should be the target.

But I'm of the opinion we get a glimpse of Timo Haula Mercer first, see how they perform, before we spend assets to acquire a 3rd line center.

 

[Devil X]

2nd unit PP's are not significant factors. Definitely not why you would acquire a player.

He would be a big improvement for the 3rd line, but he'd be expensive to acquire, has a big contract, and has baggage,

If we really want to add a center defensive guys like Gourde or Evans should be the target.

But I'm of the opinion we get a glimpse of Timo Haula Mercer first, see how they perform, before we spend assets to acquire a 3rd line center.

I can understand the may be to hard to acquire as an argument but the idea he wouldn’t improve the roster or isn’t the best overall option to do so I don’t understand.

 

[guitarguyvic]

If you get a better player coming back for the player going out then you'd be improving.

In this case you’d be “improving” by making the team more top heavy at the expense of the depth. Which is the exact opposite of what most of us want is it not?

 

[Oneiro]

Palat's numbers were from playing with guys like Stamkos and Kucherov in their primes; Miller has been the man on his line most times. I understand the drama around Miller but saying he could end up like Palat seems harsh and unrealistic!

I get people dont want the drama near our locker room but I dont think insinuating Miller wouldn't produce is fair either

You're missing the point with Palat. 30-40 pt players for 6M is a bad use of cap space and was totally predictable at the time of the signing because aging curves matter. Time and time again: Backes, Lucic, Ladd, etc.

If you're a cerebral player, like Pavelski, Elias, St. Louis, etc. it's different. Miller is not that guy.

Miller is more skilled and will produce more than the group of grinders I mentioned but the downside risk is too great for 8M in cap space for four more years. I'd argue we already have a bit of an inefficient cap hit in Timo.

More than that, I'd say the true peak of this roster will probably occur when Luke is seasoned and Silayev and Nemec/Casey are on the team. Zero reason to mess that up, let alone make resigning Nico an adventure.

 

[New Jerseys Devil]

But Nico does not need replacing. He's excellent on faceoffs and he's tied for the team lead in PP goals.

Would Miller be an improvement? I don't know, not even sure where he plays on the PP in Van, but I doubt he'd be such an improvement that I would move the team captain off the top PP.

And Nico plays tough enough defensive minutes already, if anything I'd like to lighten his load in that regard. And defensive centers are cheaper anyways.

Of course Nico doesnt need replacing; hes a stud 1st overall who can do it all! But that doesnt mean he should or even could either!! I think Nico gets stretched pretty thin sometimes with back to back shifts due to situational needs

Another center for help either his load would be great for us I think; and Id rather Nico be out there defensively than offensively, if I had to pick. So I think Miller (or any other offensive C) would help a bunch!

 

[devilsblood]

You're missing the point with Palat. 30-40 pt players for 6M is a bad use of cap space and was totally predictable at the time of the signing because aging curves matter. Time and time again: Backes, Lucic, Ladd, etc.

If you're a cerebral player, like Pavelski, Elias, St. Louis, etc. it's different. Miller is not that guy.

Miller is more skilled and will produce more than the group of grinders I mentioned but the downside risk is too great for 8M in cap space for four more years. I'd argue we already have a bit of an inefficient cap hit in Timo.

More than that, I'd say the true peak of this roster will probably occur when Luke is seasoned and Silayev and Nemec/Casey are on the team. Zero reason to mess that up, let alone make resigning Nico an adventure.

5 more years after this for Miller.

 

[devilsblood]

Of course Nico doesnt need replacing; hes a stud 1st overall who can do it all! But that doesnt mean he should or even could either!! I think Nico gets stretched pretty thin sometimes with back to back shifts due to situational needs

Another center for help either his load would be great for us I think; and Id rather Nico be out there defensively than offensively, if I had to pick. So I think Miller (or any other offensive C) would help a bunch!

Like I said somewhere above, I just want to see Timo Haula Mercer for a stretch. Quite possible we don't need to add a center at all.

LW for Nico makes more sense.

 

[Lou Bloom]

In this case you’d be “improving” by making the team more top heavy at the expense of the depth. Which is the exact opposite of what most of us want is it not?

Where in my comment was it implied you'd be getting more top heavy at the expense of depth?

 

[guitarguyvic]

Where in my comment was it implied you'd be getting more top heavy at the expense of depth?

what are you talking about? I said I don’t get the logic of trading a middle six player to try to improve depth. You said if we get a better player that makes us better. If you’re trading for a top six option then you’re making the team more top heavy. If you’re simply upgrading a single in the bottom six one-for-one, you’re not significantly improving the depth you’re just marginally improving that position.

The point is that we need more depth…we need to be ADDING to someone like Mercer, not exchanging him for something that’s slightly better or makes the team more top heavy.

 

[Lou Bloom]

what are you talking about? I said I don’t get the logic of trading a middle six player to try to improve depth. You said if we get a better player that makes us better. If you’re trading for a top six option then you’re making the team more top heavy. If you’re simply upgrading a single in the bottom six one-for-one, you’re not significantly improving the depth you’re just marginally improving that position.

The point is that we need more depth…we need to be ADDING to someone like Mercer, not exchanging him for something that’s slightly better or makes the team more top heavy.

If you trade Mercer and get a better player in return, how is that not improving the forward depth? Do you think the Holtz for Cotter trade didn't improve forward depth since both players were considered similarly value wise?

The two moves aren't mutually exclusive. You can trade Mercer for a good 3C and then go out and find a winger in a separate move. Centers are more valuable and harder to find, if some team values Mercer because of his age, contract and previous performance and is willing to trade a player you think is better and a better team fit than I don't see how that trade wouldn't make sense.

 

[Triumph]

If you trade Mercer and get a better player in return, how is that not improving the forward depth? Do you think the Holtz for Cotter trade didn't improve forward depth since both players were considered similarly value wise?

This is just a semantics argument but I think in general guitarguyvic is right here, when you think of 'improving depth', you think of adding a piece without taking one away. At the very least, cap-wise, you're really not improving depth by doing that, because the better player likely costs more, and so while you might get e.g. a better 5th best forward, you are likely sacrificing your 9th best forward to do that. For a team that has maybe Gritsyuk coming in and then nothing else, it's a tough sell.

The two moves aren't mutually exclusive. You can trade Mercer for a good 3C and then go out and find a winger in a separate move. Centers are more valuable and harder to find, if some team values Mercer because of his age, contract and previous performance and is willing to trade a player you think is better and a better team fit than I don't see how that trade wouldn't make sense.

Sure, but you have to say that.

I don't like trading Mercer now because I think he's a better player than he's shown so far this season, and I don't think he loses any value by staying here another year. I don't think you can likely trade him for a 'good 3C' either.

 

[Lou Bloom]

This is just a semantics argument but I think in general guitarguyvic is right here, when you think of 'improving depth', you think of adding a piece without taking one away. At the very least, cap-wise, you're really not improving depth by doing that, because the better player likely costs more, and so while you might get e.g. a better 5th best forward, you are likely sacrificing your 9th best forward to do that. For a team that has maybe Gritsyuk coming in and then nothing else, it's a tough sell.



Sure, but you have to say that.

I don't like trading Mercer now because I think he's a better player than he's shown so far this season, and I don't think he loses any value by staying here another year. I don't think you can likely trade him for a 'good 3C' either.

It depends on how much value Mercer has to the acquiring team. I've said before that I'd do a trade around Mercer for Pinto who costs $250K less on the cap because I believe in Pinto's short term and long term potential over Mercer's. Maybe the Predators value Mercer due to the connection with Brunette and a trade around Mercer for O'Reilly makes sense which only accounts for a $500K addition to the cap.

If those players provide higher level of impact on the team than how is that not improving the overall depth of the team since you'll be getting better performance in place of the minutes that Mercer was occupying?

Just for example would you trade Mercer for the next Sam Bennett if he were available? Florida got Bennett as a struggling and underutilized 24 year old center and he became one of the best 3Cs in the NHL.

Of course Mercer could lose value, the older a player gets the less teams are going to be willing to pay on potential. Nobody cared that Kaapo Kakko was a former top prospect with a solid age 21 season when he followed it up with back to back poor seasons of play. If Mercer continues to struggle and is unable to lock up a top 6 spot then of course his value will lower because how many teams are going to value a 3rd line winger?

 

[Guttersniped]

It depends on how much value Mercer has to the acquiring team. I've said before that I'd do a trade around Mercer for Pinto who costs $250K less on the cap because I believe in Pinto's short term and long term potential over Mercer's. Maybe the Predators value Mercer due to the connection with Brunette and a trade around Mercer for O'Reilly makes sense which only accounts for a $500K addition to the cap.

If those players provide higher level of impact on the team than how is that not improving the overall depth of the team since you'll be getting better performance in place of the minutes that Mercer was occupying?

Just for example would you trade Mercer for the next Sam Bennett if he were available? Florida got Bennett as a struggling and underutilized 24 year old center and he became one of the best 3Cs in the NHL.

Of course Mercer could lose value, the older a player gets the less teams are going to be willing to pay on potential. Nobody cared that Kaapo Kakko was a former top prospect with a solid age 21 season when he followed it up with back to back poor seasons of play. If Mercer continues to struggle and is unable to lock up a top 6 spot then of course his value will lower because how many teams are going to value a 3rd line winger?

What does a Pinto for Mercer trade have to with a trade for a 31 year old making 8m?

Also there’s something really wrong with Miller or the Canucks wouldn’t be forced to ship his ass out.

It’s not like they don’t want to win now.

And you don’t see players randomly taking mysterious 1 month leaves.

If he’s a problem here what are we supposed to do with him?

 

[Lou Bloom]

What does a Pinto for Mercer trade have to with a trade for a 31 year old making 8m?

Also there’s something really wrong with Miller or the Canucks wouldn’t be forced to ship his ass out.

It’s not like they don’t want to win now.

And you don’t see players randomly taking mysterious 1 month leaves.

If he’s a problem here what are we supposed to do with him?

The original comment I replied to was:

Not sure I get the logic of trying to improve our forward depth…by trading away one of our middle six forwards.

Which has nothing to do with JT Miller. I actually don't think Miller is a good target for the Devils.

I do think it makes a lot of sense to trade Mercer though for a better player/fit.

 

[None Shall Pass]

Miller would give us some center depth for the next few years. He's a very good top-6 center now; even if he slows down, it's not like we have any center prospects he'd be blocking like what we're dealing with with Nemec (and maybe Casey soon enough). A top-6 center playing 3C with spot duty at 2C when Jack or Nico get hurt for a few years would be pretty cool.

The money sucks and the contract length is worse, but having center depth of Hughes, Hischier, Miller and Haula going into the playoffs would be nothing but awesome.

Not saying I'd love the trade, especially since I have no clue what it'd cost, but I'm not sure I'd hate it either. For this season, though, it'd be awesome.

 

[Devil X]

The original comment I replied to was:



Which has nothing to do with JT Miller. I actually don't think Miller is a good target for the Devils.

I do think it makes a lot of sense to trade Mercer though for a better player/fit.

I get being frustrated with Mercer but I’m probably not moving him for a like player mid season. Maybe in the Summer. You don’t want to run the risk in season or taking a step back with the forwards.

 

[New Jerseys Devil]

Like I said somewhere above, I just want to see Timo Haula Mercer for a stretch. Quite possible we don't need to add a center at all.

LW for Nico makes more sense.

Thats fair too! The thought of Miller was fun so I chimed in. Odds are we get what, a third liner? Some scoring depth would go a long way to helping alleviate the top-6, thats for sure!

 

[Lou Bloom]

I get being frustrated with Mercer but I’m probably not moving him for a like player mid season. Maybe in the Summer. You don’t want to run the risk in season or taking a step back with the forwards.

Carolina and Colorado just traded elite level players midseason. I don't think Mercer for a 3C is going to tank this team's chemistry.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Carolina and Colorado just traded elite level players midseason. I don't think Mercer for a 3C is going to tank this team's chemistry.

Colorado traded Rantanen because they couldnt pay him. That is not the same situation.

Necas is not an elite level player.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

 

[Triumph]

It depends on how much value Mercer has to the acquiring team. I've said before that I'd do a trade around Mercer for Pinto who costs $250K less on the cap because I believe in Pinto's short term and long term potential over Mercer's. Maybe the Predators value Mercer due to the connection with Brunette and a trade around Mercer for O'Reilly makes sense which only accounts for a $500K addition to the cap.

I would never trade Mercer for Pinto but that's me. If Pinto runs afoul of the NHL again vis a vis gambling he is probably banned for life, and that's just leaving aside the fact that Pinto really doesn't appear to be an on-ice upgrade.

If those players provide higher level of impact on the team than how is that not improving the overall depth of the team since you'll be getting better performance in place of the minutes that Mercer was occupying?

It's just semantics. Please understand that what you are doing is just playing a word game and not actually saying anything. To me, you improve depth by adding another player to what you have. You insert another player on to your depth chart somewhere between 1 and 12, without subtracting anything, or alternately add 2 players and subtract 1, etc. You can improve by trading a worse player for a better player, but you are not improving your depth by doing so.

Just for example would you trade Mercer for the next Sam Bennett if he were available? Florida got Bennett as a struggling and underutilized 24 year old center and he became one of the best 3Cs in the NHL.

This isn't an example. There is no such thing as 'the next Sam Bennett'. But sure, in your hypothetical example that's meant to make my argument look unsound, I would do that.

Of course Mercer could lose value, the older a player gets the less teams are going to be willing to pay on potential. Nobody cared that Kaapo Kakko was a former top prospect with a solid age 21 season when he followed it up with back to back poor seasons of play. If Mercer continues to struggle and is unable to lock up a top 6 spot then of course his value will lower because how many teams are going to value a 3rd line winger?

Kakko is a terrible example because he has always struggled to get more than 3rd line ice time - he did that age 21 season and then that was it. Mercer is playing over 17 minutes a game, he's playing on PP2 and PK1; he's 4th among Devils forwards in TOI/game. This is why talking about things in terms of 'top 6' and 'bottom 6' is foolish. If Mercer continues to play that much, there's no difference between trading him now (almost certainly at the lowest point of his value, given on-ice shooting percentages and the like) and trading him next season.

 

[Lou Bloom]

Colorado traded Rantanen because they couldnt pay him. That is not the same situation.

Necas is not an elite level player.

That has nothing to do with my point. I was giving an example of two playoff teams making major changes in season to their roster. The point is that trading Mercer for another forward isn't going to destroy the team's chemistry.

Also Necas being an elite player is going to depend on what you view as elite. He's currently top 15 in scoring and has clearly made huge improvements this season.