Management GM Pierre Dorion/Front Office Thread - Part IX [Mod Warning in post 1)

[Golden_Jet]

Courtesy of gophnx.com

3. How will the Coyotes manage the Jakob Chychrun situation?​

Jakob Chychrun trade rumors may have finished a close second to arena stories on the list of Coyotes offseason storylines. But just as GM Bill Armstrong predicted at the draft in Montréal in June, Chychrun is still a Coyote. The question now is how the team will manage the situation with their talented 24-year-old defenseman, who made his displeasure with the ongoing rebuild crystal clear on break-up day last spring?

Chychrun spoke at Coyotes Media Day media on Wednesday, providing a clearer picture of his current feelings.

“The way things kind of played out, which hasn’t really been talked about much, last year the team had approached me a couple times, one before the season, one early on in the season and we just had discussions on where I was at mentally and where the team was at; the trajectory of the team,” Chychrun said. “The team basically communicated to me, knowing the type of competitor and person that I am, they indicated that if this rebuild was going to be something that was hard or difficult on me that [if] I wanted to be in a different situation and get moved on, that they were going to be willing to do that and make that happen for me. Throughout the start of last season, I had a lot of reflection time and some really, really emotional, hard reflections with my loved ones and family and we ultimately decided to take them up on that offer and try to get moved on to a better situation.

“Like we talked about at the end of last season, my desire [is] to win in this league and careers are so short. The time flies by. I’m going into my seventh year here in Arizona; seventh year in the NHL. I don’t want these years to keep going by and be 10, 12 years into the league and not had a real good chance or shot at, not only the playoffs but winning a Stanley Cup. You ask anybody who plays a sport at the highest level, they’re all going to tell you they play it to win. That’s really my mentality and where I’m at. I think the team understands that. I think it’s kind of a mutual position for me to get moved on to a situation with a chance to win and a team that’s fighting for the Stanley Cup and for them here to be able to get assets. I understand how rebuilds work. I think it could be mutually beneficial.”

Chychrun was the second-to-last person to speak at media day so it is unclear how the team will react to his statement. As for camp, fans will not get to see Chychrun on the ice for a bit. He is still rehabbing after offseason wrist surgery (he had another on the same wrist the previous summer) and he also revealed that he had a bone spur removed from his ankle, an injury that he said bothered him last year and kept him out at the end of the season. While he is able to handle pucks, he is not cleared to shoot as the wrist heals.

“We’re still kind of playing it, I guess week by week, seeing how I continue to progress,” he said. “Things are feeling really good. I’m in a really good place mentally, Physically, I feel like I’m in phenomenal shape and just ready to keep ramping up. I definitely won’t be out there with the guys at the start of camp and not sure about preseason yet either.”

 

[Hale The Villain]

How many objective observers were there? There was a whole board of (understandably) butt hurt Sens fans screaming that they wanted more flesh.

Myself and a few others preferred he be moved because of the risk associated with injury related decline.

Who was objective?

He was certainly elite throughout the ecf in 17. He also clearly wasn't the same the following season and hasn't been since. If you understand what you see and were being objective, then moving on was the right call.

Idk. Maybe you don't understand what you see. Maybe you can't be objective. The truth lies in there somewhere.

There were plenty. I'm talking about fans of other teams who weren't invested one way or another in the Karlsson return.

It was almost universally panned by them, not just by the vast majority of Sens fans. It looked like the kind of proposal one would make on an EA NHL video game where you don't give up any key pieces that really hurt to lose but just keep adding secondary players, B prospects and 2nd round picks until the value meter is high enough that the AI accepts the trade.

I think everyone would have been fine if Karlsson's return had a similar framework to that of Eichel's - a young top 6 forward, a likely future top 6 forward prospect and a 1st, rather than a greater number of lesser assets with no guaranteed difference maker coming back.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

There were plenty. I'm talking about fans of other teams who weren't invested one way or another in the Karlsson return.

It was almost universally panned by them, not just by the vast majority of Sens fans. It looked like the kind of proposal one would make on an EA NHL video game where you don't give up any key pieces that really hurt to lose but just keep adding secondary players, B prospects and 2nd round picks until the value meter is high enough that the AI accepts the trade.

I think everyone would have been fine if Karlsson's return had a similar framework to that of Eichel's - a young top 6 forward, a likely future top 6 forward prospect and a 1st, rather than a greater number of lesser assets with no guaranteed difference maker coming back.

Bingo. Let's not forget that the Sens advertised this trade as "Sens acquire six assets" and not "Sens acquire Josh Norris and more."

The revisionism here is staggering.

 

[DaveMatthew]

There were plenty. I'm talking about fans of other teams who weren't invested one way or another in the Karlsson return.

It was almost universally panned by them, not just by the vast majority of Sens fans. It looked like the kind of proposal one would make on an EA NHL video game where you don't give up any key pieces that really hurt to lose but just keep adding secondary players, B prospects and 2nd round picks until the value meter is high enough that the AI accepts the trade.

I think everyone would have been fine if Karlsson's return had a similar framework to that of Eichel's - a young top 6 forward, a likely future top 6 forward prospect and a 1st, rather than a greater number of lesser assets with no guaranteed difference maker coming back.

So if Ottawa had acquired Labanc + Norris + 1st that would have turned the trade from absolute disaster to success?

I think you're overestimating the value Karlsson had. Judging by the leaks during 2017/18 and the summer of 2018, teams weren't clamoring to give up a lot for him. Tampa, reportedly, wouldn't offer Cal Foote. Vegas said no on Cody Glass. Dallas laughed at Heiskanen and was a no-go on Hintz.

And in hindsight, they were right and Doug Wilson was wrong and cost himself his job.

And remember, while he also had injury concerns, Jack Eichel was 5 years younger and locked up long-term at the time of his trade.

 

[Hale The Villain]

So if Ottawa had acquired Labanc + Norris + 1st that would have turned the trade from absolute disaster to success?

I think you're overestimating the value Karlsson had. Judging by the leaks during 2017/18 and the summer of 2018, teams weren't clamoring to give up a lot for him. Tampa, reportedly, wouldn't offer Cal Foote. Vegas said no on Cody Glass. Dallas laughed at Heiskanen and was a no-go on Hintz.

Absolutely not.

Tuch > Lebanc
Kreb > Norris

(at time of trade, not now)

I believe that Dallas wouldn't give up Heiskanen and Vegas wouldn't give up Glass. They both looked like future stars in the making at that time.

Leaks aren't exactly undeniable proof. I don't believe Tampa wouldn't put Foote on the table. Dallas might have wanted to not sell-low on Hintz after a bad first AHL season but if valued properly I don't buy that he'd be off the table either.

 

[Micklebot]

And remember, while he also had injury concerns, Jack Eichel was 5 years younger and locked up long-term at the time of his trade.

3 years younger at the time of their trades, and getting experimental ( for the sport) surgery with no indication of how it would turn out.

 

[DaveMatthew]

3 years younger at the time of their trades, and getting experimental ( for the sport) surgery with no indication of how it would turn out.

+ He was signed for 5 more seasons.
+ We already knew how the surgeries affected Karlsson. He was a diminished player.

It's funny how during this discussion, you put other players in the worst possible light yet avoid doing the same for Karlsson, ignoring all of the factors that would have diminished his value.

If you want to evaluate the pieces Ottawa received based on their value in 2018, you need to evaluate Erik Karlsson based on his value in 2018 as well, not his value in 2016.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Absolutely not.

Tuch > Lebanc
Kreb > Norris

(at time of trade, not now)

I believe that Dallas wouldn't give up Heiskanen and Vegas wouldn't give up Glass. They both looked like future stars in the making at that time.

Leaks aren't exactly undeniable proof. I don't believe Tampa wouldn't put Foote on the table. Dallas might have wanted to not sell-low on Hintz after a bad first AHL season but if valued properly I don't buy that he'd be off the table either.

That’s a weird thing to say, Karlsson was traded a year before Krebs was even drafted.

 

[Hale The Villain]

That’s a weird thing to say, Karlsson was traded a year before Krebs was even drafted.

Obviously I meant at the time of their respective trades.

 

[Micklebot]

+ He was signed for 5 more seasons.
+ We already knew how the surgeries affected Karlsson. He was a diminished player.

It's funny how during this discussion, you put other players in the worst possible light yet avoid doing the same for Karlsson, ignoring all of the factors that would have diminished his value.

If you want to evaluate the pieces Ottawa received based on their value in 2018, you need to evaluate Erik Karlsson based on his value in 2018 as well, not his value in 2016.

So, what we knew was Karlsson had a poor season after missing training camp due to surgery. Usually the season after a major surgery resulting in missing all summer training and camp is viewed as a write-off. It's why we gave Pageau the benefit of the doubt after he returned from Achilles surgery. Karlsson definitely hasn't managed to get back to where he was, but we didn't know that he wouldn't at the time, that's rewriting history. In fact, what you say was a clearly damaged Karlsson, still led all D in pts per game and finished 6th in D scoring.

Yes, Eichel was signed for 4 seasons more than Karlsson was, 5 total, but by no means at a discount, he essentially had the high price deal already, which added to the risk since if the surgery went poorly you knew you were stuck with him for 5 years at 10 mil. The risk was much higher with Eichel imo.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Obviously I meant at the time of their respective trades.

No it’s not obvious then.

Krebs has never been regarded higher than Norris, at any time.

Unless your saying something dumb, like Krebs in 2021 was better than Norris was in 2018. If that’s what you’re saying you need to be much clearer. Even that would be odd, as Krebs was older for that comparison, and it’s like comparing apples with cucumbers, from different harvesting years.

 

[Micklebot]

That’s a weird thing to say, Karlsson was traded a year before

No it’s not obvious then.

Krebs has never been regarded higher than Norris, at any time.

Unless your saying something dumb, like Krebs in 2021 was better than Norris was in 2018. If that’s what you’re saying you need to be much clearer. Even that would be odd, as Krebs was older for that comparison, and it’s like comparing apples with cucumbers, from different harvesting years.

He was comparing trade values at the time of their respective trades, which seems pretty logical given the context of the discussion.

 

[Hale The Villain]

No it’s not obvious then.

Krebs has never been regarded higher than Norris, at any time.

Unless your saying something dumb, like Krebs in 2021 was better than Norris was in 2018. If that’s what you’re saying you need to be much clearer. Even that would be odd, as Krebs was older for that comparison, and it’s like comparing apples with cucumbers, from different harvesting years.

It's entirely obvious and I have no idea how you could think otherwise.

Krebs in 2021/22 was absolutely worth more than Norris in 2017/18.

Before being dealt Krebs was fresh off two excellent WHL seasons where his production approached a 2 points per game average, whereas Norris had a disappointing freshman year with 23 points in 37 games.

Norris is the better player now and will probably always be, but that was not at all obvious at the time of the Karlsson trade. Looked like the opposite.

 

[JD1]

So if I can sum this all up

At the time of the trade it was a horrible return

Notwithstanding it worked out really well it was still a horrible trade

Another way of wording that I was right then, but even though I'm horribly wrong now, I'm still right

 

[topshelf15]

Two 1st,s both unprotected,Branstrom and Soko...Yes yes I know the risk,s about trading unprotected high picks but its time to play past the picks ...

 

[Golden_Jet]

It's entirely obvious and I have no idea how you could think otherwise.

Krebs in 2021/22 was absolutely worth more than Norris in 2017/18.

Before being dealt Krebs was fresh off two excellent WHL seasons where his production approached a 2 points per game average, whereas Norris had a disappointing freshman year with 23 points in 37 games.

Norris is the better player now and will probably always be, but that was not at all obvious at the time of the Karlsson trade. Looked like the opposite.

Wouldn’t you mean 18/19 then in your scenario. Since the trade happened at the start of the 18/19 season

 

[Micklebot]

Wouldn’t you mean 18/19 then in your scenario. Since the trade happened at the start of the 18/19 season

The last season Norris played was 17-18 at the time of the trade where as Kreb had already played in the 21-22 season prior to being traded. I think that's what he may have been getting at.

 

[topshelf15]

TBH Wilson had fleeced Ottawa just a bit too much for my liking ,so turn about is fair play as far as Iam concerned....Remember he is from Ottawa and he ripped us off completely in the Heatley deal and the Hoffman deal

 

[Senscore]

TBH Wilson had fleeced Ottawa just a bit too much for my liking ,so turn about is fair play as far as Iam concerned....Remember he is from Ottawa and he ripped us off completely in the Heatley deal and the Hoffman deal

That Hoffman shit was a total bush league move.


f*** Doug Wilson.

 

[DaveMatthew]

So, what we knew was Karlsson had a poor season after missing training camp due to surgery. Usually the season after a major surgery resulting in missing all summer training and camp is viewed as a write-off. It's why we gave Pageau the benefit of the doubt after he returned from Achilles surgery. Karlsson definitely hasn't managed to get back to where he was, but we didn't know that he wouldn't at the time, that's rewriting history. In fact, what you say was a clearly damaged Karlsson, still led all D in pts per game and finished 6th in D scoring.

Yes, Eichel was signed for 4 seasons more than Karlsson was, 5 total, but by no means at a discount, he essentially had the high price deal already, which added to the risk since if the surgery went poorly you knew you were stuck with him for 5 years at 10 mil. The risk was much higher with Eichel imo.

I couldn't disagree more strongly.

Much higher? C'mon. There was significant risk with both players, both had diminished value, and quite frankly, both Buffalo and Ottawa got lucky that Karlsson and Eichel navigated their way out of their organizations. Ottawa and Buffalo are better off, Vegas and San Jose are worse.

So if I can sum this all up

At the time of the trade it was a horrible return

Notwithstanding it worked out really well it was still a horrible trade

Another way of wording that I was right then, but even though I'm horribly wrong now, I'm still right

It flips sometimes though.

When a trade works out well (Karlsson), it’s not the outcome that matters, it’s the relative value of the assets at the time of the trade that’s important.

When a trade works out poorly (Duchene), it’s not the relative value of the assets at the time of the trade that matters, it’s the outcome that’s important.

 

[Micklebot]

I couldn't disagree more strongly.

Much higher? C'mon. There was significant risk with both players, both had diminished value, and quite frankly, both Buffalo and Ottawa got lucky that Karlsson and Eichel navigated their way out of their organizations. Ottawa and Buffalo are better off, Vegas and San Jose are worse.

Karlsson had just come off a down season where he had the highest pts per game of any D, only had 1 year left on the deal so you could pull out if his health deteriorated or adjust the offer if he clearly showed he would never be worth it again,

Eichel was having a surgery that no NHL player had ever had, and if it it failed you were stuck with him at 10 mil for 5 years, yeah I'd say that was a higher risk with less opportunities to mitigate the risk.

As for whether Buffalo is better off and VGK worse, maybe wait and see how Eichel recovers, if he gets back to form idk if that's going to be the case. If he is what we saw last season sure, but it's foolish to judge Eichel on this past seasons performance.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Karlsson had just come off a down season where he had the highest pts per game of any D, only had 1 year left on the deal so you could pull out if his health deteriorated or adjust the offer if he clearly showed he would never be worth it again,

Eichel was having a surgery that no NHL player had ever had, and if it it failed you were stuck with him at 10 mil for 5 years, yeah I'd say that was a higher risk with less opportunities to mitigate the risk.

As for whether Buffalo is better off and VGK worse, maybe wait and see how Eichel recovers, if he gets back to form idk if that's going to be the case. If he is what we saw last season sure, but it's foolish to judge Eichel on this past seasons performance.

Yes, the acquiring team could have pulled out and let Karlsson walk if his health and play continued to deteriorate (Wilson choosing the opposite route got him fired and put SJ in purgatory for the next several years). But they would not have been able to recoup the assets they paid to acquire him from Ottawa. Hence why they weren't willing to pony up all that much.

Ergo - the return that Ottawa received, even if you look at the value of assets at the time, was fine.

And great, Karlsson put up points in 17/18. He put up points in 18/19 too, his first year in San Jose. But he was still a shell of his former self, and couldn't defend. He continued to take risks offensively, but wasn't able to get back the way he did in his prime. He's since adjusted to play a safer game and now isn't all that great at either end.

Buffalo is better off for the simple reason that they were able to reset their entire culture. Eichel had become a cancer for that organization. Vegas is in cap hell with an aging, injury prone core.

But I’m curious. From the rumoured suitors (SJ, TB, DAL and VGK), what should Dorion have gotten in return for it to be fair value? Would Tuch + Brannstrom + 1st been okay? After all, Brannstrom was a consensus top prospect at the time.

 

[topshelf15]

Two firsts unprotected ,Soko and a 2nd ....Is what I would offer as a final....The picks are what they are ,either we are in for picks or we are pushing our chips in to make the playoffs...We have boatloads of young talented players now is the time to strike as far as Iam concerned...

 

[GCK]

Since Heatley was mentioned, how much does it suck that we lost both the Heatley trades.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

Since Heatley was mentioned, how much does it suck that we lost both the Heatley trades.

Nah the 1st one was even, if not a win for us.

I love Hossa but Heatley helped get us closer to a cup than we had ever been.