PatrikOverAuston
Laine > Matthews
But people fail to realize Sam Bennett is still going to be a very effective top 6 forward.
"People" probably fail to realize that because it's wishful thinking.
But people fail to realize Sam Bennett is still going to be a very effective top 6 forward.
I agree Konecny has more value.
But people fail to realize Sam Bennett is still going to be a very effective top 6 forward.
In general most offers for Bennett are pointless.
If you get a Tolvanen or a Konecny, sure, trade him. But won’t happen. So me might as well keep him.
Yes. Hence why I said do you "settle" for Bennett, or roll the dice with guys who could be top 6 players. I roll the dice and if wrong, they still could be another Bennett.
All honesty, where do you see Bennett ending up position wise, point wise.
If he ends up like that, then you should be happy.He’s looked better on the wing, at least more productive but I’m not sure that his position has been set quite yet. He has parts of his game well suited for being a C, but he’s also built really well for playing on the wing as he has good speed, physicality, and is more free to use his skill to create offence.
I think when all is said and done, he’s going to much like Zibanejad in terms of production. Some fans think lower because our fan base has zero patience, but I think 50-65pts (ie. Simmonds) is probably a fair projection. Of course his floor is what he is now, but I see lots of room for growth in his game.
If he ends up like that, then you should be happy.
All honesty, where do you see Bennett ending up position wise, point wise.
Do you see him at C or wing? If he ends up being that, he can still be a very effective player.45 annually with strong D. Second PP. PKer.
Do you see him at C or wing? If he ends up being that, he can still be a very effective player.
But it makes no sense to trade Monahan for value. We are only moving him for an overpayment.
Do you see him at C or wing? If he ends up being that, he can still be a very effective player.
Easily understood...Aho + 1st is huge overpayment....much less adding Hanifin.
Good pointThat's not true at all. It comes down to this:
Do you settle for Bennett who is looking to be a 30-40 point guy.
Or do you roll the dice on a guy who still has more upside.
Just look at the last draft. Bennett would not return Frost, Tolvanen, Kostin...and they were 3 of the last 5 picks in the 1st Rd.
Now obviously if you are a GM and you think you can "fix" Bennett and turn him into a 50+ point guy, that is a different story.
When you draft in the 1st Rd, you are still dealing with top 6 talent and guys that can be top 6 players. The current Bennett level is what you hope for if the guy does not reach his potential. I would never "settle" for the lower end and trade a 1st for 30ish point forward.
I'd really rather not unless Fox straight up tells us he won't sign here.Fox+ to NYR for their latest 1st is what I see happening. The + is added because it’s unsure if Fox would sign
This might sound insane, but if Canucks win the lottery I'd easily give up Tkachuk and more. Size and nastiness is overrated, especially if you can get Dahlin.
Quinn Hughes will be better than Dahlin. And Dahlin will be really good.
As a Rangers fan I’d rather keep the pick because we’re already good on RHD but that’s just something I can see happeningI'd really rather not unless Fox straight up tells us he won't sign here.
Please no. At least not until after the Draft Lottery. Dahlin >>> Tkachuk.Send us Tkachuk, and we give you Vancouver 1st.
If Hartman+5th can return a late 1st and 4th I think Bennett might be able to? Bennett can play C (how effective not sure I beleive most his points come at wing), is a year younger and have similar point totals prior to being traded.
Hartman has had a lot more success compared to bennet and is a much better player.
That is actually not true based on data. Hartman is almost 2 yrs older and their stats are not that much difference.