Proposal: (NSH/SEA) Askarov Tomasino for Wright

[Hockey Know it all]

to Nashville Predators
Shane Wright ( entry level contract )

to Seattle Kraken
Philip Tomasino ( RFA that will get $1m cap or lower )
Yaroslav Askarov ( elite GK prospect, AHL injury callup for now )


Both teams are going to be a little over cap after they sign their RFAs. This doesn't solve that, but it doesn't make it any worse either. This does however leave Seattle with only 3 centers (and a need to reduce cap), so I propose that they trade Tanev to Columbus for Danforth after doing this. They get a 4C and they open up the cap they need to sign Beniers. Nashville would still be over cap, but that's totally regardless of this proposal, and this doesn't make the situation worse.

SEATTLE GOALTENDING
24/25 - Grubauer + Daccord
25/26 - Grubauer + ????? (Daccord? Askarov? UFA?)
26/27 - Grubauer + Askarov
27/28 - Askarov + ?????
( Kokko is waiver eligible in 2028 if he ends up being NHL worthy )

This is a HORRIBLE outlook for Askarov.

While I don’t think he is ready for 55+ games as a starter, he DEFINITELY wouldn’t want to be traded to a team who doesn’t play him for another 4+ years lmao.

I don’t know where you think that making this move would be positive for Askarov and his career, hypothetically.

 

[BLNY]

Potential =/= production. I will add that Kraken doesn't seem to have a spot for him in the top 9, so Wright may be better off with another year of AHL. Also, Seatlle probably doesn't have much use for Tomasino for the same reasons.

If he has a good camp, I think they make room for him. Firing Hakstol was a no-brainer. Bringing in Bylsma and Campbell is strategic. I can't see a scenario where they aren't working with him this year.

 

[theVladiator]

This isn't gospel, but one of the Seattle mods (@Fistfullofbeer) had this out there as a potential lineup. I think there's room for Shane in the top nine.

I don't see this trade from the Kraken's point of view.

I think the disagreement here is only about the most appropriate way to describe the situation. I would say "might be able to force himself into the top 9" is a better description of it than "has a spot in the top 9". The potential lineup that was posted pushes Tolvanen (recently signed a 3.5M AAV extension), onto the 4th line. That lineup feels more like a hope than plan A to me.

 

[Soundgarden]

As a Kraken fan, no, no and double no.

What would we need to add, we have 2 1sts and 2 2nds next year.

 

[dtown77]

If I was Seattle I would say no.. but my gut tells me Seattle would win this trade once it plays out.

 

[lanceuppercut75]

This is a HORRIBLE outlook for Askarov.

While I don’t think he is ready for 55+ games as a starter, he DEFINITELY wouldn’t want to be traded to a team who doesn’t play him for another 4+ years lmao.

He can be 1 of the 2 NHL goalies on the Seattle roster as soon as one year from now, if he shows that he's ready. He's guaranteed to be 1 of the 2 goalies on the roster two years from now, as they won't put him on waivers unless he's a bust.

Once he's on the roster, he can push Grubauer for playing time, and could become the 1-A goalie and make Grubauer the 1-B goalie. All depending on his play and what he earns, of course.

It's either 1 year or a maximum of 2 years. No idea where you're getting "4 years" from.

EDIT - and again, "zero years from now / now" is probably no longer a realistic option. Teams get their goaltending figured out around the time of the draft and the beginning of free agency. We've already passed that point and teams have their goaltending figured out for the upcoming season. There aren't really any openings on NHL rosters, with maybe like 3 exceptions that all seem somewhat unlikely. "One season from now" is now basically the best that Askarov can hope for. Seattle offers "one season from now", and many other teams do not.

 

[Irie]

I don't hate it from a value perspective, but Seattle simply can't make a trade like this.

Daccord had an outstanding year and should be a high priority to sign to an extension, meanwhile, the Kraken are in desperate need of game breaking talent up front, and have no elite players (yet) in their entire system.

IMO, the need to gamble on Wright possibly becoming an elite goal scorer and Daccord continuing to provide solid goaltending is much higher than the gamble to bring in a potential future franchise goaltender in Askarov and lettting Daccord walk while giving up Wright in the process.

This trade has potential to be a great move for Seattle, but due to current organizational needs and current personnel, it is a gamble that Francis just can't take.

 

[Dead Coyote]

You don't trade a top 6 #1C potential player for a goalie, no matter how pedigreed and young and high potential, ever.

How many teams have won the cup with a homegrown goalie that they drafted or traded for coming out of the draft in recent years?

Fleury, Murray, Crawford, Vasi and Quick? Binnington I guess? Cam Ward in his rookie year? Brodeur? Saros is another guy but hasn't won the cup yet. And of those guys only Fleury had the kind of pedigree Askarov does, There's no point in trading for a guy before he's even played in the NHL and giving up significant assets for him when you can win the cup with guys like Kuemper, Binnington, JS Guigere, Bob etc getting hot. It's far more about the team in front of them.

This makes Seattle worse.

 

[kihei]

What would we need to add, we have 2 1sts and 2 2nds next year.

You don't need to add anything. You need to subtract Wright.

Barring a stupendously massive over-payment, he is not going anywhere. And if that massive over-payment magically occurred, which it won't, the deal wouldn't feature a goalie coming to us as the centrepiece.

 

[CanadienShark]

You don't trade a top 6 #1C potential player for a goalie, no matter how pedigreed and young and high potential, ever.

How many teams have won the cup with a homegrown goalie that they drafted or traded for coming out of the draft in recent years?

Fleury, Murray, Crawford, Vasi and Quick? Binnington I guess? Cam Ward in his rookie year? Brodeur? Saros is another guy but hasn't won the cup yet. And of those guys only Fleury had the kind of pedigree Askarov does, There's no point in trading for a guy before he's even played in the NHL and giving up significant assets for him when you can win the cup with guys like Kuemper, Binnington, JS Guigere, Bob etc getting hot. It's far more about the team in front of them.

This makes Seattle worse.

Holtby?

You just named basically all of the cup winning teams.

 

[Dead Coyote]

Holtby?

You just named basically all of the cup winning teams.

Sure, add Holtby too.

Now how many of those guys are actually still on those teams and weren't guys who just got hot at the time, or were decent or good enough playing behind their godlike team that could have won with a cardboard cut out?

Outside of MAF and Vasi, and you can argue Quick probably too cause he was decent for quite a while there, most of those guys just got hot and then fell back down to earth. Not to mention there's the Kuemper's, Bobrovsky's, MAF (again!), etc guys who you can pick up in FA or at the trade deadline every year. I mean Stuart Skinner was just in the cup finals.

It's horrible asset management to trade highly sought after assets for goalies who are by definition inconsistent 99% of the time. It's fine to trade a combination of picks or some decent prospects, sure. But you don't trade the 4th overall pick who just put up a near .5PPG in the NHL and is likely going to grow a ton in his sophomore season.

Crawford, Giguere, Holtby, Ward, Murray, Binnington, these are not even close to perennial vezina candidates or top 5 goalies of their era. They're guys who were almost always found in the later round of the draft, developed, and then turned out hot at the right time.

The list of players who weren't drafted is just about as long, too. Giguere, Fleury, Kuemper, Bob, Thomas, Khabibulin.

It's pretty much even more obvious when you include the other teams that go far in the playoffs.

 

[CanadienShark]

Sure, add Holtby too.

Now how many of those guys are actually still on those teams and weren't guys who just got hot at the time, or were decent or good enough playing behind their godlike team that could have won with a cardboard cut out?

Outside of MAF and Vasi, and you can argue Quick probably too cause he was decent for quite a while there, most of those guys just got hot and then fell back down to earth. Not to mention there's the Kuemper's, Bobrovsky's, MAF (again!), etc guys who you can pick up in FA or at the trade deadline every year. I mean Stuart Skinner was just in the cup finals.

It's horrible asset management to trade highly sought after assets for goalies who are by definition inconsistent 99% of the time. It's fine to trade a combination of picks or some decent prospects, sure. But you don't trade the 4th overall pick who just put up a near .5PPG in the NHL and is likely going to grow a ton in his sophomore season.

Crawford, Giguere, Holtby, Ward, Murray, Binnington, these are not even close to perennial vezina candidates or top 5 goalies of their era. They're guys who were almost always found in the later round of the draft, developed, and then turned out hot at the right time.

The list of players who weren't drafted is just about as long, too. Giguere, Fleury, Kuemper, Bob, Thomas, Khabibulin.

It's pretty much even more obvious when you include the other teams that go far in the playoffs.

We're talking about the same Giguere who won the Conn Smythe with a losing effort in I think 2002? Ward literally won the Smythe in his rookie year. Holtby was a dominant playoff goalie for years - see his entry to the NHL for example.

 

[Nogatco Rd]

We're talking about the same Giguere who won the Conn Smythe with a losing effort in I think 2002? Ward literally won the Smythe in his rookie year. Holtby was a dominant playoff goalie for years - see his entry to the NHL for example.

Yeah Holtby is way up there in playoff SV%. Top 5 if you’re only counting guys with 30+ starts.

 

[bert]

As a neutral fan this seems like an absolute rip off for Nashville.

 

[Dead Coyote]

We're talking about the same Giguere who won the Conn Smythe with a losing effort in I think 2002? Ward literally won the Smythe in his rookie year. Holtby was a dominant playoff goalie for years - see his entry to the NHL for example.

That only proves my point. They came in for a couple of years and then dropped back down to earth. Ward has been a middling goalie almost his entire career outside of those playoff runs. Gigeure was solid and at his peak was great but he didn't have a consistent peak. Murray and Binnington have been pretty bad. Middling at best.

Holtby was good and is underrated but he still isn't the type of goalie who's a perennial vezina candidate. Calling him dominant is a bit much. Yes, he had pretty good stats overall.

Crawford was just good enough to give his team a chance to win and that Blackhawks team was stacked for years. Holtby is the best of the bunch but he's still not a top 5 goalie.

And I was speaking after the lockout and salary cap for the record.

None of this is my point though and I'm not going to argue about whether these goalies were good or not, my point is very simple, you don't trade a potential #1C for a goalie, ever, especially when that goalie has never seen time in the NHL. You can get a goalie who will be able to carry you to the finals for much less of a cost than a potential #1C, recent 4th overall draft pick who was ranked #1 and has had a great year in the AHL and put up around .5PPG in the NHL in his rookie year.

 

[CanadienShark]

Sure, add Holtby too.

Now how many of those guys are actually still on those teams and weren't guys who just got hot at the time, or were decent or good enough playing behind their godlike team that could have won with a cardboard cut out?

Outside of MAF and Vasi, and you can argue Quick probably too cause he was decent for quite a while there, most of those guys just got hot and then fell back down to earth. Not to mention there's the Kuemper's, Bobrovsky's, MAF (again!), etc guys who you can pick up in FA or at the trade deadline every year. I mean Stuart Skinner was just in the cup finals.

It's horrible asset management to trade highly sought after assets for goalies who are by definition inconsistent 99% of the time. It's fine to trade a combination of picks or some decent prospects, sure. But you don't trade the 4th overall pick who just put up a near .5PPG in the NHL and is likely going to grow a ton in his sophomore season.

Crawford, Giguere, Holtby, Ward, Murray, Binnington, these are not even close to perennial vezina candidates or top 5 goalies of their era. They're guys who were almost always found in the later round of the draft, developed, and then turned out hot at the right time.

The list of players who weren't drafted is just about as long, too. Giguere, Fleury, Kuemper, Bob, Thomas, Khabibulin.

It's pretty much even more obvious when you include the other teams that go far in the playoffs.

We're talking about the same Giguere who won the Conn Smythe with a losing effort in I think 2002? Ward literally won the Smythe in his rookie year. Holtby was a dominant playoff goalie for years - see his entry to the NHL for example.

That only proves my point. They came in for a couple of years and then dropped back down to earth. Ward has been a middling goalie almost his entire career outside of those playoff runs. Gigeure was solid and at his peak was great but he didn't have a consistent peak. Murray and Binnington have been pretty bad. Middling at best.

Holtby was good and is underrated but he still isn't the type of goalie who's a perennial vezina candidate. Calling him dominant is a bit much. Yes, he had pretty good stats overall.

Crawford was just good enough to give his team a chance to win and that Blackhawks team was stacked for years. Holtby is the best of the bunch but he's still not a top 5 goalie.

And I was speaking after the lockout and salary cap for the record.

None of this is my point though and I'm not going to argue about whether these goalies were good or not, my point is very simple, you don't trade a potential #1C for a goalie, ever, especially when that goalie has never seen time in the NHL. You can get a goalie who will be able to carry you to the finals for much less of a cost than a potential #1C, recent 4th overall draft pick who was ranked #1 and has had a great year in the AHL and put up around .5PPG in the NHL in his rookie year.

Look at Giguere's playoff stats in his two trips to the finals. Very, very good. Holtby is one of the top playoff goalies ever and he's literally a Vezina winner.

 

[Interior Cascadian]

Niki

Once he's on the roster, he can push Grubauer for playing time, and could become the 1-A goalie and make Grubauer the 1-B goalie. All depending on his play and what he earns, of course.

Daccord is already pushing Grubauer. Why bring in another goalie who will perform similarly (best case scenario) when Seattle will have to pay someone to take his contract? And at the expense of Wright? There’s no way that happens.

The reality is, with Grubauer’s contract what it is, he’s most valuable to Seattle platooning the crease with Daccord.