Value of: Drouin for Dman

[The Macho King]

Well, you’d risk losing Dotchin or Koekkoek. Why not just wait. Vegas has to take a min of 9 Dmen and can draft of max of 13, plus they will have the money to acquire UFA Dmen. They are going to have some good Dmen for sale because it’s about the only way they will be able to get a young top 6 forward.

Re: Koekkoek - no big loss there. Regarding Dotchin - would suck, but the risk is minor when we are one of the few teams who will leave a forward with actual skill exposed.

 

[KingsOfCali25]

That's terrible. Namestnikov + 2nd is equal to the 1st, if it's this years, but I wouldn't do Drouim straight up for Muzzin. He's 28 too, not old but would be looking for someone 24 or under.

Namestnikov + 2nd is not worth the 10th overall pick in any draft. Namestnikov is maybe worth a 2nd at his very highest. No GM would trade the 10th overall pick for 2 2nds. And Muzzin for Drouin isn't that bad if Stevie Y was looking at Shattenkirk for Drouin. The huge difference between the 10th overall and Namestnikov + 2nd...gets close to the difference in Muzzin for Drouin. LA might need a small add but nothing terribly big.

 

[Viqsi]

Pump the breaks there dude.

It's the plain truth. To acquire Zach Werenski, you would need to be offering a C or D of comparable age, ability, upside, and contract status. The closest thing the Lightning has to any of that is Hedman, and even if one doesn't consider the fact that the Lightning would never even consider offering him for anything the Jackets have, he's seven years older than Werenski and on a contract we won't be able to afford.

* * *​

Calm down with the hyperbole.

The lightning have more than enough assets to acquire Zach Werenski.

They do not. The Lightning do not have the correct kind of asset that is necessary. See above.

It's not a question of "enough", it's a question of "wrong kind". There's not that many teams in the NHL that have the right sorts of asset needed, and the Lightning are not one of them.

Yes, everyone's available for the "right price"... but players are not fungible assets, and so not everybody is actually capable of paying that price. It's not enough to have value; you have to have it in the correct form.

 

[ltpato]

It's the plain truth. To acquire Zach Werenski, you would need to be offering a C or D of comparable age, ability, upside, and contract status. The closest thing the Lightning has to any of that is Hedman, and even if one doesn't consider the fact that the Lightning would never even consider offering him for anything the Jackets have, he's seven years older than Werenski and on a contract we won't be able to afford.

* * *​

They do not. The Lightning do not have the correct kind of asset that is necessary. See above.

It's not a question of "enough", it's a question of "wrong kind". There's not that many teams in the NHL that have the right sorts of asset needed, and the Lightning are not one of them.

Yes, everyone's available for the "right price"... but players are not fungible assets, and so not everybody is actually capable of paying that price. It's not enough to have value; you have to have it in the correct form.

So, you wouldn't trade Werenski for Kucherov or Stamkos?

With Kucherov in your lineup, you guys wouldn't be on the brink of elimination against Pittsburgh...

 

[LobsterMagnet19]

Not sure why the Avs do this? They completely collapsed when EJ went down with an injury and besides Zads, they have few D ready to replace him. Drouin is a nice luxury, but with Mack, Rants, Jost, Compher, Ghetto/Nieto, Landy/Duchene (assume not traded) and 1st pick Patrick/Hischier/Vilardi there is little to no room in the Top 6.

A trade for Barrie + Bigras/2nd Pick etc is likely a better option.

Because what you're offering there doesn't get Tampa to budge, and with the Avs about to embark on the next stage in a rebuild, Erik Johnson is quickly becoming too old to make sense in Colorado long term.

 

[Viqsi]

So, you wouldn't trade Werenski for Kucherov or Stamkos?

With Kucherov in your lineup, you guys wouldn't be on the brink of elimination against Pittsburgh...

Stamkos has the same age and contract issues as Hedman (relatively speaking), only moreso. Kucherov is a winger.

And if Kucherov came at the expense of Werenski, we more than likely would still be on the brink of elimination (because Murray's injured and so can't take his spot on the top pairing). Possibly would have been outscored even more than we have been as is.

 

[TampaJay]

Re: Koekkoek - no big loss there. Regarding Dotchin - would suck, but the risk is minor when we are one of the few teams who will leave a forward with actual skill exposed.

Earlier in the year I would have said Vegas would take either Killorn or Namestnikov way before any of Tampa’s exposed Dmen just because they are going to have a hell of a time finding skilled forwards. But Vegas was scouting Tampa heavily at the end of the year. Unless they were asleep, Dotchin got their attention more than Vlady.

 

[c_robio]

Earlier in the year I would have said Vegas would take either Killorn or Namestnikov way before any of Tampa’s exposed Dmen just because they are going to have a hell of a time finding skilled forwards. But Vegas was scouting Tampa heavily at the end of the year. Unless they were asleep, Dotchin got their attention more than Vlady.

I would say they likely protect Dotchin

 

[Curufinwe]

So, you wouldn't trade Werenski for Kucherov or Stamkos?

You don't seem to understand that there's a thing called the salary cap.

I wouldn't trade Provorov, who also has two years left on his ELC, for either of those guys.

 

[TampaJay]

It's the plain truth. To acquire Zach Werenski, you would need to be offering a C or D of comparable age, ability, upside, and contract status. The closest thing the Lightning has to any of that is Hedman, and even if one doesn't consider the fact that the Lightning would never even consider offering him for anything the Jackets have, he's seven years older than Werenski and on a contract we won't be able to afford.

* * *​

They do not. The Lightning do not have the correct kind of asset that is necessary. See above.

It's not a question of "enough", it's a question of "wrong kind". There's not that many teams in the NHL that have the right sorts of asset needed, and the Lightning are not one of them.

Yes, everyone's available for the "right price"... but players are not fungible assets, and so not everybody is actually capable of paying that price. It's not enough to have value; you have to have it in the correct form.

I wouldn’t trade Werenski either, but the “correct kind of asset†that CBJ needs to compete with teams like the Pens are forwards with speed and skill (like Drouin and Kucherov). That series reminds me of USA v. Canada in the WC. In Tampa, we got a bit of the opposite problem, not enough power forwards.

 

[HoseEmDown]

Namestnikov + 2nd is not worth the 10th overall pick in any draft. Namestnikov is maybe worth a 2nd at his very highest. No GM would trade the 10th overall pick for 2 2nds. And Muzzin for Drouin isn't that bad if Stevie Y was looking at Shattenkirk for Drouin. The huge difference between the 10th overall and Namestnikov + 2nd...gets close to the difference in Muzzin for Drouin. LA might need a small add but nothing terribly big.

Namestnikov was a former 1st round pick that hasn't done anything to diminish his value which should still be a late 1st. Add a 2nd and you get close to 10th in this draft or at least closer to that than Muzzin is to Drouin. We wanted Shattenkirk because he's a righty and a PP guy, two things we needed prior to the year, not as much as the year went on but still more than a LD.

 

[Paralyzer]

At first quick glance, I thought this said Drouin for Drouin.

 

[JoVel]

At first quick glance, I thought this said Drouin for Drouin.

Jonathan Drouin for Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers.

 

[KingsHockey24]

Hmmmmmmmmmmm...interesting

Good? Bad? Hmmm?

 

[Viqsi]

I wouldn’t trade Werenski either, but the “correct kind of asset†that CBJ needs to compete with teams like the Pens are forwards with speed and skill (like Drouin and Kucherov). That series reminds me of USA v. Canada in the WC. In Tampa, we got a bit of the opposite problem, not enough power forwards.

Oh, unquestionably we need more guys like that. It's just that Werenski isn't being moved for 'em. Not unless they're about the same age and play C.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Tampa:
Jake Muzzin
Adrian Kempe

LA:
Jonathan Drouin
Braydon Coburn

Replace Coburn with Garrison and add a 2nd round pick, then I'd consider it.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Anyway....

Dumba for Drouin 1:1?

Oh god no. Spurgeon+ or no deal. (Maybe a Brodin+ deal could work)

Drouin is getting slept on here so much it's hilarious.



Lemme put it this way. Would you trade Granlund for Ceci? Well IMO Drouin>Granlund and Dumba>Ceci by similar margins (value-wise).

Feel free to disagree with me though. Most do.

 

[KingsHockey24]

Replace Coburn with Garrison and add a 2nd round pick, then I'd consider it.

I'd be fine with Garrison. Not adding a pick though.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

I'd be fine with Garrison. Not adding a pick though.

Fair enough.

 

[Flat Ronnie]

Unless there's a behind the scenes issue with him, I would MUCH rather trade Johnson or Palat than Drouin

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Unless there's a behind the scenes issue with him, I would MUCH rather trade Johnson or Palat than Drouin

Samesies

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

Unless there's a behind the scenes issue with him, I would MUCH rather trade Johnson or Palat than Drouin

Agreed.

 

[RegularSznAllStars]

Oh god no. Spurgeon+ or no deal. (Maybe a Brodin+ deal could work)

Drouin is getting slept on here so much it's hilarious.



Lemme put it this way. Would you trade Granlund for Ceci? Well IMO Drouin>Granlund and Dumba>Ceci by similar margins (value-wise).

Feel free to disagree with me though. Most do.

Most disagree with you for good reason. You have stated "drouin for karlsson" at more than one point in time.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Drouin would be so sick with Rakell....

 

[AOSC]

Most disagree with you for good reason. You have stated "drouin for karlsson" at more than one point in time.

Yeah holy homer. Drouin may have more value than Granlund because of age. Going off of Drouin's point pace which was 59, Granlund had 10 more points. Granlund is basically a 70 point scorer. Drouin maybe has better tools, i.e. Shot, speed. Granlund's playmaking ability is ridiculous. I don't know what the difference is in between primary assists between the two. Granlund is also very good defensively. Saying Drouin for Karlsson is just ridiculous. Enough said on that one. Lol at Spurgeon+/Brodin+. It would be Drouin++ for them. Top Pairing Defenseman>>>Top-6 Winger.