Post-Trade Deadline Thread
- Thread starter Crede777
- Start date
punk_o_holic
Registered User
Would Carolina trade within the division? Also, if it's Staal/Skinner, Columbus would be trading away a significant piece. Would Columbus trade that within the division?
Also, even though he wasn't mentioned, any interest in Semin? Streaky but he would be the "one shot scorer" player we would need. He has 4 more years left after this season and has a cap hit of $7 million though.
Lets say Columbus had interest in Semin, which would have been better..
A)Just should have kept Gaborik. Most likely would have cost less then $7 million/season but as usual, injury concerns would have been a question mark. Pretty sure he was well liked in the dressing room as well.
B)trade assets for Semin. Don't think he has injury issues but as mentioned, streaky player but overall, when you add games played and points, it's very solid(last year, 44 gp, 44 points. This year, 57 gp, 41 points). Not sure how he would fit in the locker room(does he have attitude issues?). Two years younger then Gaborik.
Also, even though he wasn't mentioned, any interest in Semin? Streaky but he would be the "one shot scorer" player we would need. He has 4 more years left after this season and has a cap hit of $7 million though.
Lets say Columbus had interest in Semin, which would have been better..
A)Just should have kept Gaborik. Most likely would have cost less then $7 million/season but as usual, injury concerns would have been a question mark. Pretty sure he was well liked in the dressing room as well.
B)trade assets for Semin. Don't think he has injury issues but as mentioned, streaky player but overall, when you add games played and points, it's very solid(last year, 44 gp, 44 points. This year, 57 gp, 41 points). Not sure how he would fit in the locker room(does he have attitude issues?). Two years younger then Gaborik.
Semin >> Gaborik, but the extra four years on Semin's deal is the killer. We have the $ and the lineup spot next year for him, but in a couple years it could look really bad. And the impact on the team attitude of a guy like him means we probably wouldn't want him even for a year at any price. Unless everything we've heard about him is BS.
punk_o_holic
Registered User
Not sure if the attitude is true or not(I could see it being a little true but blown out of proportion because he's Russian) but would having fellow Russians like Bob,Anisimov, Tyutin, and maybe Nikitin(if he is brought back) help out?
It is true, we just don't know the extent. Going back to his Washington days he's been criticized by his teammates for not trying hard. More recently GM Rutherford in Carolina called him out for not playing hard.
As I feared; the trade deadline was a disaster. We're not even playing the players we got (nor should we be).
Genuine question - are any other teams who acquired players at the deadline currently healthy scratching them?
SuperGenius
For Duty & Humanity!
- Mar 18, 2008
- 4,639
- 199
Is it really that hard to understand that Frattin was a throw in? A warm body and contract that we had to take to get the deal done?
Jeebus. He wasn't the target of the deal, he was simply a part of it. The main deal was to dump Gaborik. Argue that all you want - and I'm right there with you that I'd rather have him here than pay him to play there, but whether Frattin plays or doesn't play doesn't mean a damn thing.
Jeebus. He wasn't the target of the deal, he was simply a part of it. The main deal was to dump Gaborik. Argue that all you want - and I'm right there with you that I'd rather have him here than pay him to play there, but whether Frattin plays or doesn't play doesn't mean a damn thing.
lol. I never thought of that. But no. I just think our GM thought we were a little better than what we are. Honestly, so did I.
This is absolutely true. The purpose of the trade was not get Frattin (he was there to balance salary and contracts... when you check the math on the deals the CBJ made that day it equals out nicely) but get as much of a return (i.e., picks) as possible for a UFA who was not part of the long term plan. Criticize the trading of Gabby if you don't agree with it, which is fair enough. However, don't try to pretend we traded him with a 4th liner as the major target...that's being disingenuous at best.
So...is a 2nd round pick (ie:worthless) better than keeping a guy who "could help" on the power play?
Uhh no, not hard at all. It is for a couple of people that actually thought JK was serious about that being someone we wanted in return.
Not sure who that was directed at; but as I said we were basically sellers at the deadline.
Its better than nothing at all. Seriously if we can get another Bjorkstrand and Heatherington with the picks than good riddance to him.
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,841
- 4,558
Not if it means lower odds of getting to the playoffs this season.
Now, I can understand not wanting to move Johansen/Murray/Jenner/1st/Wennberg. That's "protecting our future." But to worry that Gaborik may leave "for nothing" and to fret about an additional 2nd round pick at this point in the season?
That's a big no-no. In that regard, Jarmo needs to be 110% committed to icing the best lineup he can for this season. I hate to beat a dead horse, but the closest and most recent example I can give is when Howson refused to move Nash at the trade deadline. He said that the offers weren't where he wanted them to be, even though this was a player who was obviously going to be gone.
In hindsight, that was a smart and correct choice that helped the franchise. Moving Gaborik for a 2nd + cond. 3rd + Matt Frattin? Not so much...
But let's not pretend Gaborik would have fixed all of our woes. He would have helped in that he could have scored some goals and MOST importantly drawn attention away from guys like Anisimov and Foligno. That's currently, IMO, what this team is lacking. That's why our PP is so abysmal right now. Because we are "built around our backend" and have 1 plan -- to pass back to the blueline and let Wiz/Johnson/Nikitin/Tyutin shoot it and hope for a deflection. That's easy to block and easy to defend against. The PK then applies a ton of pressure to the points and causes exactly what we've been seeing.
What this team needs is a couple of major threats down low. Guys who can play in the corners who, holy crap, the PK needs to account for as well because if they don't the puck is going to wind up in the back of the net.
To that degree, the team has been poorly constructed in the last season or so since Jarmo took over. His major acquisition of Nathan Horton was more of the same when the team doesn't need more of the same. Yes, let's have Dubinsky, Foligno, Umberger, etc. Those guys are nice, but if any team is serious they need a top line scorer, a top line center, and another good forward. Johansen could potentially be that, but that's about it.
Who do we fault right now? I don't blame Bob. To be better, he would have to be an amazing top-3 goalie in the league. That's an unfair expectation of almost anyone other than Lundqvist.
Johansen? No, he's carrying as much as he can at 21 years old. He's progressing and is honestly in a much larger role than anybody last season would have predicted. Good on him, keep it up.
Same with Boone Jenner.
Murray? Well, he's been injured twice since being drafted and missed a significant amount of time. Unfortunately, that's not something he can control and he's also only 20.
Anisimov and Foligno I also don't feel comfortable blaming. They could be doing slightly better, but are about what we expected.
Mack, Letestu, Tropp, and Comeau (McElhinney too) are what they are. They try, and they bring energy, so they aren't directly the problem.
That leaves...
The Calvert - Dubinsky - Atkinson line. They've been terrible. Not getting many chances besides a couple early looks against Carolina and NYR. Atkinson brings speed and a decent shot, but overall pretty bad.
Tyutin, Wiz, and Johnson have NOT been leading defensively or offensively. Blame that on the ***** pairings if you want (Prout - Johnson, Tyutin - Wiz, Nikitin Savard) but they need to do a ton more.
Horton and Umberger need to step up or step out. They are paid big bucks and aren't producing offensively. I would have sat Horton last week.
Last edited:
Yes. A lot. Look at the transaction list for deadline day, lots of insignificant bodies got moved around.
Believe me, I am so glad that "In Jarmo/JD we trust" crap has ended, but I'm also seeing a turn towards irrational critiques of Jarmo and JD. Is trading Marian Gaborik really the reason our team shooting percentage has fallen by over half?
The Howson lesson has taught me well not to be too quick to judge a GM, so perhaps I'm being too charitable to Jarmo. But in the short run there's a lot of random effects going on and its hard to tell what's going on. Our play in the last week has little to do with anything Jarmo did. In the long run what Jarmo/JD do is huge. And if I'm correct that they're mainly committed to building a team culture of hard work around hard working players, then I think that they're on the right track.
The Howson lesson has taught me well not to be too quick to judge a GM, so perhaps I'm being too charitable to Jarmo. But in the short run there's a lot of random effects going on and its hard to tell what's going on. Our play in the last week has little to do with anything Jarmo did. In the long run what Jarmo/JD do is huge. And if I'm correct that they're mainly committed to building a team culture of hard work around hard working players, then I think that they're on the right track.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
I hope they are too but would like them to at least consider skill when adding to the lunch-pail brigade. A hard worker of the Jarome Iginla kind I'd love; another of their 3rd & 4th liners? no thanks.
If you use your pick; it's 3 years, minimum, before that player can help your team. If you use it in a trade, it may help out your team in the long term. In the majority of cases it never really helps out your team.
Gaborik wasn't going to help this team out beyond this year. No issue moving him; but we didn't replace Gaborik and didn't help out the team. If we don't make the playoffs; the front office can share in the blame.
Gaborik could help out in a few areas; he could also be a minus player. Either way we're really struggling to score. Any assistance in that area would have been welcome now. One goal in the last 3 losses could have went a long way in relaxing this team and maybe cut short this goal scoring slump.
I thought the Islanders might have helped out with the "cure"; but they shut us down too. The Islanders aren't exactly known for their stellar defense.
Their is a balancing act on the resource management side; we decided to go ultra-conservative this year. Last year was partly about getting help and shedding salary. This year it's about the future. We'll see what the offseason holds. Thus far the last offseason hasn't paid off yet (Horton).
Last edited:
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,087
- 535
I'm inclined to agree with you. It's a young team still trying to find their way, and streaks like this are part of the growing pains that everyone has to endure before getting wherever they're meant to go.
Even the great dynasties of the last 35 years had to endure a lot of growing pains before breaking through, but the common themes were (once the pieces were in place) continuity and patience. None of those teams had a collapse, then responded by making major moves and still having success. The team that came the closest to doing so was Detroit trading Yzerman to Ottawa for Yashin, and I think it's reasonable to say that if that move had actually been consummated, the Red Wings would probably still be looking for their first Cup since 1955.
The only thing I'll mention is that the Nash and Gaborik situations were totally different monsters. I'll admit that Howson was smart to hold on to Nash until he got the deal he felt necessary to make the move. Why? Because Nash was still under contract for several years to come. He could wait until he got a return he felt helped "protect the future" of this club.
Gaborik is a UFA who wasn't going to be re-signed. We've all been through enough trade deadlines to realize that you have to move him. Could Gabby have helped? Sure, but what if he didn't? Some of you would crucify Jarmo for not trading Gabby. I'm not going to defend the front office, but to his credit, Jarmo took responsibility for the original trade and admitted it was a mistake. I can accept a mistake like that because he's at least trying to make the club better. Now, to correct that error, he had to recoup some of the assets he gave up to acquire him last season. He got back two picks. These are useable assets that give the club some flexibility. He may have had something else brewing and ran out of time with the assets he acquired, we'll never know.
I know I fully expected Gabby to be traded. To say that the Nash and Gaborik situation are similiar are just wrong to me. It was a no-brainer that if Gabby was not going to be part of the future here, you have to trade him. Rip the band aid off and get it over with.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
False equivalency. If Gabby didn't help, the people crucifying Jarmo would have been the ones calling for him to (have been) traded at the deadline. Not the ones who wanted him retained for the stretch drive.
I've noticed an increased willingness to question JK's decisions but where are you seeing irrational critiques?
I know you're a stats guy but your rhetorical question about the Gabby trade and shooting percentage is needless. The complexion of the team changed at the deadline and it was in a way that must have been deflating to the room. It was also for no good reason.
JD was singing the hard work song before JK was even brought in and they still traded for Gaborik. They may be "on the right track" but so far it's hasn't been for many of the things they've done.
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,841
- 4,558
Would Gaborik have fixed our scoring problems by himself? No, but he would have helped in two ways. First, even if he isn't a 40 goal guy anymore, he's still a decent scorer and could contribute somewhat. Second, the most important aspect of having Gaborik is that he draws attention away from other players. He creates space for guys like Anisimov and Foligno while posing as a threat down low. This is where the team is faltering -- we have no credible threats down low on the PP other than Johansen along the half boards. This means PK'ers can simply press the point and not worry about what happens if someone gets the puck in the corner.
Another problem is that we didn't make a move to replace Gaborik after he was moved. Look at what Vanek returned, there was no way that they were going to have to give up "our future" to get him or someone like him. If Vanek had returned a 1st + a good prospect, yeah I can understand the hesitation. But a prospect and a conditional 2nd round pick isn't "our future" by a long stretch.
The vast majority of trade deadlines we are sellers. That is exactly the problem with this year's TDL moves. We acted like sellers instead of a team gearing up for the playoffs.Kev22 said:
Making a trade for Gaborik was an error, yes. But moving him at this point is a further error. To make the best of a bad situation, Jarmo should have treated Gaborik like the trade deadline acquisition this season and hung onto him, or moved him to recoup some assets and made a follow up move immediately to acquire a scorer.
Robert
Foligno family
Agree, but if I recall management said defense was the focus a few days before the TDL not offense.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Speculation: Roster Building Thread - Part XIII (Nanaki edition)- Latest: SnowblindNYR
-
-
