Sens Vader
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2016
- 7,496
- 5,334
I'm making an argument against this idea that a team like Ottawa is "done" building. That continuing to replenish the organization with high end talent isn't going to be important going forward.
The Sens can't put any protection on the pick. If we finished bottom-8 and kept the pick, then we'd owe them the 2026 pick but that pick has to be forfeited to the league.Depends on how high we are on Rutger, but next years first may be worth the gamble
Like 1st top 8 protected + JBD for Rutger + Stanley
The Sens can't put any protection on the pick. If we finished bottom-8 and kept the pick, then we'd owe them the 2026 pick but that pick has to be forfeited to the league.
For the market we are, they are absolutely important. We should by now have a steady rotation of cost controlled, elc talent coming onto the team. Some of those players would eventually replace fringe core players. We quite simply do not ever benefit from the kinds of discounts players might take with other notable franchises. We rather have to overpay, which means we need to be more savvy with rotating cost controlled talent into the lineup.The core of the group would be done since they're all early/mid 20s. You don't need 1st rounders to augment the holes around that anymore. See Toronto/Tampa and other cup contenders that rarely have 1st rounders. For us after adding McGroarty/Yakemchuk, the only areas that would need addressing is the occasional 2nd liner and the bottom six. Both are simple UFA fixes, or fixed by prospects that could come internally from any round (ie. Ostapchuk/Donovan/Halliday).
Between trading a 1st for McGroarty, and losing a 1st to the NHL for the Daddy fiasco, I think it's something a core like that could sustain. I'd actually be pumped with that core.
The core of the group would be done since they're all early/mid 20s. You don't need 1st rounders to augment the holes around that anymore. See Toronto/Tampa and other cup contenders that rarely have 1st rounders. For us after adding McGroarty/Yakemchuk, the only areas that would need addressing is the occasional 2nd liner and the bottom six. Both are simple UFA fixes, or fixed by prospects that could come internally from any round (ie. Ostapchuk/Donovan/Halliday).
Between trading a 1st for McGroarty, and losing a 1st to the NHL for the Daddy fiasco, I think it's something a core like that could easily sustain.
For the market we are, they are absolutely important. We should by now have a steady rotation of cost controlled, elc talent coming onto the team. Some of those players would eventually replace fringe core players. We quite simply do not ever benefit from the kinds of discounts players might take with other notable franchises. We rather have to overpay, which means we need to be more savvy with rotating cost controlled talent into the lineup.
There is a clear model for how this team should be managing talent.
Now, I'm not opposed to trading the first for rutger, but to blanket statement say this core doesn't need first round talent coming in on the regular serioualy undervalues the kind of moneyball hockey this franchise should be adhering to.
That team is so stacked at forward now he wouldn't have any hope of ever hitting the ice. He'd be about 14 or 15 on their depth chart after they cleaned up this offseason so far.Watch him end up signing in Edmonton and finding a way to suck away McDrai's production
I doubt they trade Ostapchuk he plays the game exactly the way they are teaching at development camp. I think there are a few others they could move instead like Jarventie, Petersson or JBD.
Greig for McGroarty makes sense if we think McGroarty can step in right away and be an impact player, and if they aren't going to take some soft package deal.
Greig is getting 3M+ next season and we have very little cap flexibility. McGroarty will be on his ELC for another 2 seasons after this one.
I highly doubt we would have to move Greig to get him. I could be wrong, but I think people are going to be shocked at how poor the return will be for him. College UFAs in there situations rarely get peak value. Philadelphia shopped Gauthier around at the draft prior to trading him and couldn't secure a top 10 pick. They got Drysdale back for him, but I don't think Drysdale was at the peak of his value with his injury issues and up and down first few seasons.
The fact that they didn't move him at the draft is telling. I think they end up with a solid B+ type prospect and a future 2nd. I don't think they end up with anything close to 13th overall in value. If it's just draft picks it will be two second round picks. Something like that.
Right now, I would prefer to get back to a more normal, healthy cycle of drafting and developing. Yes, we could trade 2025 for a more ready prospect, but that means we're not drafting in the first round again until 2027. And at some point, the bill comes due.
But hey, I'm not as high on McGroarty as others seem to be, so there's that. If it were our 2nd+Jarventie (which I could see us offering, easily) or maybe our 2nd+Ostapchuk (I'm less convinced they offer Ostapchuk), it becomes a different story.
How dare you forget MVP Tom Pyatt?Guy Boucher's pet winger whose name I genuinely forget.
Didn’t Fox only want to play for the Rangers though? As far as we know McGroarty just wants NHL minutes so there’s a wider range of teams that can trade for him, which should mean his value is higher than Fox’s would have been.Gauthier is a better prospect than McGroarty and was traded at the peak of his value, post dominant WJC and before he'd publicly demanded a trade.
Adam Fox, coming off his junior season (so closer to UFA, and therefore with more leverage) as a Hobey Baker finalist might be closer to a comparable. He went for a second and conditional third that became a second based on Fox's games played (he played over 30 NHL games and it upgraded). Whether he was held in as high regard then as McGroarty is now, I'm not sure. He was a damn good prospect, though.
Meh, wasnt impressed with his game especially with Florida in the playoffsTarasenko to the Wings for not a lot more than Perron. Let the rage ensue!
Meh, probably close in value at this point. Perron's skating is an issue but he's much better defensively than Tarasenko.Tarasenko to the Wings for not a lot more than Perron. Let the rage ensue!
Didn’t Fox only want to play for the Rangers though? As far as we know McGroarty just wants NHL minutes so there’s a wider range of teams that can trade for him, which should mean his value is higher than Fox’s would have been.
To get McGroarty, we would need to send one of Greig or Ostapchuk IMO plus a pick. McGroarty, is highly valued and likely turns into a top 6 with good development.
Meh, wasnt impressed with his game especially with Florida in the playoffs
Meh, wasnt impressed with his game especially with Florida in the playoffs
Lol, deja vu. But I agree, he was okay on the run, but nothing special. I'm happy to with Perron.Meh, probably close in value at this point. Perron's skating is an issue but he's much better defensively than Tarasenko.
You're missing the part where we need to assume 1-3 years of development for that talent to come in. Missing the next 2 years leaves us with another gap in the rotation we would need to otherwise fill through tradesI agree, but I still maintain that our current core with Yakemchuk + McGroarty should be able to get through the next two years without 1sts just fine, and looks like a contending core on top of that. After the two years of pain are over, go back to rotating cost controlled talent. The bulk of our core is locked in long-term. I really don't think the next two years would be a problem if we brought in McGroarty.