Speculation: Jakob Chychrun being held out of the Coyotes lineup until a trade is completed

Status
Not open for further replies.

PainForShane

formerly surfshop
Dec 24, 2019
2,785
3,230
Do you recall any parts of the deal? (New info to me.) Thanks.

IIRC it was something around Ceulemans and the 12th overall pick -- but apparently Chychrun said no so then we traded up to the 11th spot instead (Geekie). Decently widely reported (and a deal that makes sense) so i think most ppl assume it's true
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marshall

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
23,127
9,817
Visit site
Do you recall any parts of the deal? (New info to me.) Thanks.
We know for sure it included the 12th overall pick because BA was very vocal that if they hadn't overpaid to take Geekie at 11 to San Jose that they were sure he wasn't going to make it past 12th. PHNX did a podcast on it with Portzline. If I have time I can try to link it later to this thread.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,903
85,266
Redmond, WA


There was an expectation that Hextall wouldn't be willing to trade major assets to begin with. Him saying this makes me think 1st rounders and things of that value would be on the table for someone like Chychrun.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,903
85,266
Redmond, WA
Chychrun for Kapanen, Pickering, ‘23 1sr and ‘23 2nd?

I think the value is fine but I'm skeptical Hextall would do both Pickering and the 2023 1st in the deal. I think he'd much rather do either Joseph or Smith in place of Pickering, even if the Penguins need to add more.

I'd offer Smith, Tristan Broz, the 2023 1st and 2023 2nd as futures pieces for Chychrun. I don't know that Smith does a ton for the Coyotes (relative to where he was drafted), since he is already about to be 23, but Broz as a secondary piece seems like it should be extremely appealing for the Coyotes.
 

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
23,127
9,817
Visit site


Podcast early in season where Portzline references a player who kiboshed a trade this past summer before they changed their mind after the Johnny Hockey signing. That player is obviously Chychrun but not outright stated. 8:22 in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marshall

rt

Clean Hits on Substack
I think the value is fine but I'm skeptical Hextall would do both Pickering and the 2023 1st in the deal. I think he'd much rather do either Joseph or Smith in place of Pickering, even if the Penguins need to add more.

I'd offer Smith, Tristan Broz, the 2023 1st and 2023 2nd as futures pieces for Chychrun. I don't know that Smith does a ton for the Coyotes (relative to where he was drafted), since he is already about to be 23, but Broz as a secondary piece seems like it should be extremely appealing for the Coyotes.
I’d rather look elsewhere. Maybe wait for the draft and see if more non playoff teams come forward.
 

Golden_Jet

Registered User
Sep 21, 2005
25,499
13,068
IIRC it was something around Ceulemans and the 12th overall pick -- but apparently Chychrun said no so then we traded up to the 11th spot instead (Geekie). Decently widely reported (and a deal that makes sense) so i think most ppl assume it's true
Chychurn said no, he’s too young for any NTC . Why even ask him, move him if you like the deal.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,903
85,266
Redmond, WA
I’d rather look elsewhere. Maybe wait for the draft and see if more non playoff teams come forward.

The rumor from the Athletic this morning was that the Coyotes wanted a 2025 and 2026 1st rounder for Chychrun for the Penguins, which they rightfully said no to. I wonder if a 2023 1st and a 2024 1st would be sufficient instead.

I wouldn't want to do both Pickering and the 2023 1st at this point, but I would be willing to do the 2023 1st and 2024 1st with sensible lottery protections.
 

Strangle

Registered User
May 4, 2009
9,580
6,789
Ban movement of players on IR or who haven’t played in a calendar year. Make the teams that signed those deals live with them. This means if Vancouver wants to LTIR OEL’s contract 2 years from now they can’t get him off the books ever and will be hamstrung by the cap.


Also makes it more imperative for a team likely on his list like Edmonton or Winnipeg to act while they can.

The purpose of the cap is a necessary evil, due to varying market conditions. However, the existence of the cap is only … ONLY …. To promote parity.

The league doesn’t want to ‘punish’ teams with the cap, because that ends up in a situation that works directly against the entire reason the cap exists.

The NHL wants teams to be able to move players, trade players, make decisions within the rules to circumvent the cap. That’s why salary retention can be traded for, even to a 3rd party team.

If there wasn’t such disparity between team revenues, there wouldn’t be a cap at all.

So no, there won’t be any rules like this, the NHL doesn’t want to use the cap to make teams bad
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Hockey Tonk Man

rt

Clean Hits on Substack
The rumor from the Athletic this morning was that the Coyotes wanted a 2025 and 2026 1st rounder for Chychrun for the Penguins, which they rightfully said no to. I wonder if a 2023 1st and a 2024 1st would be sufficient instead.

I wouldn't want to do both Pickering and the 2023 1st at this point, but I would be willing to do the 2023 1st and 2024 1st with sensible lottery protections.
I suspect that was part of the return. The price has been reported as three assets all along. The equivalent of two picks in the 20s and one pick in the 50s. That really hasn’t changed.
 

PainForShane

formerly surfshop
Dec 24, 2019
2,785
3,230
Chychurn said no, he’s too young for any NTC . Why even ask him, move him if you like the deal.

Oh look it's you. Still trying to convince everyone that Chychrun is being sheltered after you literally saw a chart showing his ES TOI against Tampa was mostly against the Kucherov and Stamkos lines? That was an interesting take. At least you shared with everyone that neutral zone draws exist, we're all impressed.

To answer this question though, you'll have to ask Bill I have no idea. Probably the same reason he approached JC in the first place regarding the upcoming rebuild and the fact that pretty much everyone knows what the cost to acquire Chychrun is. BA's too transparent for his own good
 

Strangle

Registered User
May 4, 2009
9,580
6,789
My point of view from a HC Leaf fan (please accept my apologies, I was born into it)

Someone asked if Toronto can even afford Chychrun and my response

Yes and no, if Arizona really likes Knies all it might take is him + 2024 1st
I'd consider it but Chychrun has only played 70 NHL games in a season once (including playoffs), 60 games in a season once and the other five seasons a mix of 40 and 50 games.
All of that to say the guy is not reliable, in fact he is less reliable then Murray but at least Murray at one point in his career was reliable I'm not sure if I'd want him, even if it costs our 2024 1st + Robertson + some prospect they like

Never apologize for cheering for the most awesome team in the history of the NHL
 

hbk

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
23,127
9,817
Visit site
The purpose of the cap is a necessary evil, due to varying market conditions. However, the existence of the cap is only … ONLY …. To promote parity.

The league doesn’t want to ‘punish’ teams with the cap, because that ends up in a situation that works directly against the entire reason the cap exists.

The NHL wants teams to be able to move players, trade players, make decisions within the rules to circumvent the cap. That’s why salary retention can be traded for, even to a 3rd party team.

If there wasn’t such disparity between team revenues, there wouldn’t be a cap at all.

So no, there won’t be any rules like this, the NHL doesn’t want to use the cap to make teams bad
I don't disagree but what AZ is doing is well within the rules and i realize it's not you complaining about it but I'm merely suggesting a way to prevent AZ from doing it. the problem though with my suggestion is it screws the other "richer" teams and would pretty much eliminate trades going forward.
 

Golden_Jet

Registered User
Sep 21, 2005
25,499
13,068
The purpose of the cap is a necessary evil, due to varying market conditions. However, the existence of the cap is only … ONLY …. To promote parity.

The league doesn’t want to ‘punish’ teams with the cap, because that ends up in a situation that works directly against the entire reason the cap exists.

The NHL wants teams to be able to move players, trade players, make decisions within the rules to circumvent the cap. That’s why salary retention can be traded for, even to a 3rd party team.

If there wasn’t such disparity between team revenues, there wouldn’t be a cap at all.

So no, there won’t be any rules like this, the NHL doesn’t want to use the cap to make teams bad
The purpose of the cap is actually cost certainty
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad