Post-Trade Deadline Thread

[Crede777]

Agree, but if I recall management said defense was the focus a few days before the TDL not offense.

Right, but that was based on the fact that we were not short of goals when we honestly should have been. The players had been producing at unsustainably high levels relative to their talents, in my opinion, and were going to "cool off" eventually.

Also it was obviously based on our injuries to our blueline. However, one focus does not exclude the other. You can go in expecting to add on defense AND go in expecting to add on offense. Further, this season you could do so without incurring a huge cost.

At the start of the season, numerous hockey writers stated that in order for Columbus to succeed, Gaborik would have to regain his form. He never did, but we were buoyed by a surprisingly high rate of goal scoring which masked a major problem that has existed since Davidson came in. Right when he came in, Davidson said "we don't have any top line forwards with the exception being possibly Johansen developing into one." What have they done since then? They acquired Gaborik and Horton. Now, Gaborik is gone and honestly Horton has been similar to Umberger his last season in Boston and this season. The need for better forwards still exists.

The inability of the front office to have foreseen this slump is what is concerning. They should have realized that our players were playing above their heads and done something to correct it or account for it. It would be like expecting Bobrovsky to maintain his stats from last season... him doing so would be pretty ridiculous and everyone knew to expect a slight regression this season. Luckily, they didn't give him a huge contract and gave him one more fitting for the goalie he is (#10-6 in the league as opposed to #1-2).

If I were to find out that Gaborik was demanding to be moved, I'd change my opinion of the situation. But not being willing to hang onto Gaborik for the playoff push just doesn't make sense. It especially doesn't make sense in light of letting Prospal go for nothing despite the fact that he was our highest scorer and could have probably returned something similar to Frattin + 2nd/3rd. Not that I disagree with not bringing back Prospal, but if Jarmo was willing to keep an aging and injury prone winger for the playoff push last year, why not this year?

 

[Robert]

Right, but that was based on the fact that we were not short of goals when we honestly should have been. The players had been producing at unsustainably high levels relative to their talents, in my opinion, and were going to "cool off" eventually.

Also it was obviously based on our injuries to our blueline. However, one focus does not exclude the other. You can go in expecting to add on defense AND go in expecting to add on offense. Further, this season you could do so without incurring a huge cost.

At the start of the season, numerous hockey writers stated that in order for Columbus to succeed, Gaborik would have to regain his form. He never did, but we were buoyed by a surprisingly high rate of goal scoring which masked a major problem that has existed since Davidson came in. Right when he came in, Davidson said "we don't have any top line forwards with the exception being possibly Johansen developing into one." What have they done since then? They acquired Gaborik and Horton. Now, Gaborik is gone and honestly Horton has been similar to Umberger his last season in Boston and this season. The need for better forwards still exists.

The inability of the front office to have foreseen this slump is what is concerning. They should have realized that our players were playing above their heads and done something to correct it or account for it. It would be like expecting Bobrovsky to maintain his stats from last season... him doing so would be pretty ridiculous and everyone knew to expect a slight regression this season. Luckily, they didn't give him a huge contract and gave him one more fitting for the goalie he is (#10-6 in the league as opposed to #1-2).

If I were to find out that Gaborik was demanding to be moved, I'd change my opinion of the situation. But not being willing to hang onto Gaborik for the playoff push just doesn't make sense. It especially doesn't make sense in light of letting Prospal go for nothing despite the fact that he was our highest scorer and could have probably returned something similar to Frattin + 2nd/3rd. Not that I disagree with not bringing back Prospal, but if Jarmo was willing to keep an aging and injury prone winger for the playoff push last year, why not this year?

Great analysis all around….!

My son is still baffled why management didn’t go after Vanek or even Moulson… either would be a nice asset to have right now.. I myself thought keeping a healthy Gaborik would be as good as picking up a top six forward and not much else needed to be done for the offense, we had great offensive numbers at the time.

 

[SuperGenius]

Great analysis all around….!

My son is still baffled why management didn’t go after Vanek or even Moulson… either would be a nice asset to have right now.. I myself thought keeping a healthy Gaborik would be as good as picking up a top six forward and not much else needed to be done for the offense, we had great offensive numbers at the time.

How do you know they didn't?

 

[SuperGenius]

If I were to find out that Gaborik was demanding to be moved, I'd change my opinion of the situation. But not being willing to hang onto Gaborik for the playoff push just doesn't make sense. It especially doesn't make sense in light of letting Prospal go for nothing despite the fact that he was our highest scorer and could have probably returned something similar to Frattin + 2nd/3rd. Not that I disagree with not bringing back Prospal, but if Jarmo was willing to keep an aging and injury prone winger for the playoff push last year, why not this year?

I imagine this is the question that will keep us up at nights this summer if they miss the playoffs.

 

[Robert]

How do you know they didn't?

I don’t, not any more than I don’t know if they went after Halak or anyone else based on the information at hand.. If there was information out there about management going after Vanek or Moulson I either missed it or it was a well hidden attempt..

 

[FANonymous]

If I were to find out that Gaborik was demanding to be moved, I'd change my opinion of the situation. But not being willing to hang onto Gaborik for the playoff push just doesn't make sense. It especially doesn't make sense in light of letting Prospal go for nothing despite the fact that he was our highest scorer and could have probably returned something similar to Frattin + 2nd/3rd. Not that I disagree with not bringing back Prospal, but if Jarmo was willing to keep an aging and injury prone winger for the playoff push last year, why not this year?

Are you really comparing Prospal and Gaborik? Because it sounds like you are, but there actually isn't any comparison to be made there. Prospal may have been aging, but "injury prone?" Not in the slightest. Hell, Prospal played every game in the shortened and condensed season. Only Tyutin and Umberger can make that same claim. The season before that? He played all 82 games.

 

[punk_o_holic]

If I were to find out that Gaborik was demanding to be moved, I'd change my opinion of the situation. But not being willing to hang onto Gaborik for the playoff push just doesn't make sense. It especially doesn't make sense in light of letting Prospal go for nothing despite the fact that he was our highest scorer and could have probably returned something similar to Frattin + 2nd/3rd. Not that I disagree with not bringing back Prospal, but if Jarmo was willing to keep an aging and injury prone winger for the playoff push last year, why not this year?

I think the difference was Howson signed Prospal and it didn't cost them any assets. So losing him for nothing was fine. Jarmo traded away assets for Gaborik. I think Jarmo just wanted to recoup some assets back, even if it was worse then what he gaved up.

 

[Crede777]

Are you really comparing Prospal and Gaborik? Because it sounds like you are, but there actually isn't any comparison to be made there. Prospal may have been aging, but "injury prone?" Not in the slightest. Hell, Prospal played every game in the shortened and condensed season. Only Tyutin and Umberger can make that same claim. The season before that? He played all 82 games.

That still doesn't explain why they were willing to let one player walk but absolutely just had to move Gaborik for anything they could get back.

How do you know they didn't?

The baffling part for me isn't that they didn't get either of those players... it's that they didn't get either and then proceeded to move Gaborik.

 

[punk_o_holic]

Agree, but if I recall management said defense was the focus a few days before the TDL not offense.

Accidentlly deleted my original post so I will write it again.

I heard that they were planning on trading away a defensemen(for a forward?) but with the injuries they suffered, they decided not to and keep all their defenders.

This was tweeted by Portzline. It sounded like he heard it from Jarmo but he didn't give out direct quotes.

 

[FANonymous]

That still doesn't explain why they were willing to let one player walk but absolutely just had to move Gaborik for anything they could get back.

I think it explains it perfectly fine. Vinny wasn't traded at the deadline because he was healthy and producing. Gaborik was not healthy and not producing. There's a difference between trading someone who is your top scorer and someone who could've been your top scorer if he hadn't missed the vast majority of the season with injuries.

It's pretty easy to play the what if game, questioning how our playoff push would happen if Gaborik was still here. Well, what if he got injured two games after the deadline and missed the rest of the season? Then people would be *****ing about how he's obviously injury prone and we should've gotten some value out of him while we had the chance.

At the time of the trade, the team was doing alright without him, there didn't seem to be any dire need for him to be here and it looked unlikely that he was going to be back next year, so yeah, under those circumstances I would've traded him away too and I would not apologize for it.

 

[Crede777]

It's pretty easy to play the what if game, questioning how our playoff push would happen if Gaborik was still here. Well, what if he got injured two games after the deadline and missed the rest of the season? Then people would be *****ing about how he's obviously injury prone and we should've gotten some value out of him while we had the chance.

Maybe, but I wouldn't be one of those complaining. Frattin + a 2nd isn't worth the risk.

Consider what the Kings obviously thought when they saw value in him. I'd put my money on the Kings being right more than Jarmo...

Also, doing "alright" or "just fine" is a dangerous, dangerous mindset for a team that is trying hard to make the playoffs.

 

[FANonymous]

Maybe, but I wouldn't be one of those complaining. Frattin + a 2nd isn't worth the risk.

Isn't worth the risk of what exactly? Gaborik being here doesn't magically guarantee we're getting into the playoffs. We easily could be just as lousy with him here, or he could once again get injured and be completely worthless. At least this way when he gets injured in LA, we already got some minor compensation back for him.

 

[Crede777]

Isn't worth the risk of what exactly? Gaborik being here doesn't magically guarantee we're getting into the playoffs. We easily could be just as lousy with him here, or he could once again get injured and be completely worthless. At least this way when he gets injured in LA, we already got some minor compensation back for him.

It's not worth giving away someone who could potentially help even a little this season.

And you're talking as if he'll get injured guaranteed. That isn't guaranteed at all. We could be doing just as lousy, or not. But without him, we ARE doing lousy and I would have said so before the TDL too. I figured we would run into a cold streak and am amazed that Jarmo didn't realize that.

The right move was to either improve the team THIS SEASON or to do NOTHING AT ALL. Instead, he risked making it worse (by not allowing Gaborik to contribute if healthy and we aren't going to benefit from Frattin or the 2nd this year) for a small payout. It's low risk / high reward for the Kings and, regardless of the risk, it's a low reward for the Jackets.

 

[db2011]

I think it explains it perfectly fine. Vinny wasn't traded at the deadline because he was healthy and producing. Gaborik was not healthy and not producing. There's a difference between trading someone who is your top scorer and someone who could've been your top scorer if he hadn't missed the vast majority of the season with injuries.

It's pretty easy to play the what if game, questioning how our playoff push would happen if Gaborik was still here. Well, what if he got injured two games after the deadline and missed the rest of the season? Then people would be *****ing about how he's obviously injury prone and we should've gotten some value out of him while we had the chance.

At the time of the trade, the team was doing alright without him, there didn't seem to be any dire need for him to be here and it looked unlikely that he was going to be back next year, so yeah, under those circumstances I would've traded him away too and I would not apologize for it.

You're arguing like we got something back for Gabby, and we didn't. It was like a salary-dump trade for a player whose salary was gone next year anyhow. What do you think we got out of the Gaborik trade? Do you think the 2nd round pick is more valuable than the potential he could contribute? Full discloure: if you think that, I think you're crazy.

I don't think the original trade was a mistake even though it didn't turn out like we'd wanted it to, but the second trade is definitely a failure. I wonder if Jarmo will so candidly admit that, as well.

 

[FANonymous]

You're arguing like we got something back for Gabby, and we didn't. It was like a salary-dump trade for a player whose salary was gone next year anyhow. What do you think we got out of the Gaborik trade? Do you think the 2nd round pick is more valuable than the potential he could contribute? Full discloure: if you think that, I think you're crazy.

I don't think the original trade was a mistake even though it didn't turn out like we'd wanted it to, but the second trade is definitely a failure. I wonder if Jarmo will so candidly admit that, as well.

Hmmmmm we traded away a guy that barely saw the ice this season, in return we got a guy that barely sees the ice and a 2nd round pick. Seems like a good trade to me.

 

[Mayor Bee]

You're arguing like we got something back for Gabby, and we didn't. It was like a salary-dump trade for a player whose salary was gone next year anyhow. What do you think we got out of the Gaborik trade? Do you think the 2nd round pick is more valuable than the potential he could contribute? Full discloure: if you think that, I think you're crazy.

I don't think the original trade was a mistake even though it didn't turn out like we'd wanted it to, but the second trade is definitely a failure. I wonder if Jarmo will so candidly admit that, as well.

None of us even knows what the return for Gaborik is because the parameters of the trade are so bizarre and convoluted.

Here's how I understand it, and there's no guarantee that it's right.

Gaborik was traded to Los Angeles for Frattin, a 2014 or 2015 2nd-rounder (Pick #1), and a 2014 or 2015 conditional 2nd- or 3rd-rounder (Pick #2).

Pick #2 becomes a 2nd-rounder if Los Angeles makes the second round of the playoffs OR re-signs Gaborik, otherwise it's a 3rd-rounder. The actual terminology for "re-signs" isn't known; if he hits UFA status and then signs with Los Angeles, I don't know if that counts as "re-signs". If the draft takes place and then Gaborik re-signs before July 1, the pick would defer to 2015.

Pick #1 may have been traded twice. Toronto traded a two-round conditional pick to Anaheim, and a two-year conditional pick to Los Angeles. The two-year conditional one is from the Bernier deal, with the Maple Leafs holding the option on whether it's their 2014 or 2015 2nd-rounder. The two-round conditional is from the Peter Holland trade, with it being a 3rd-rounder if he played less than 25 games and a 2nd-rounder if it's more than 25.

The problem with pick #1 is that the option is ultimately held by Toronto, then by Anaheim. I think.

 

[db2011]

Hmmmmm we traded away a guy that barely saw the ice this season, in return we got a guy that barely sees the ice and a 2nd round pick. Seems like a good trade to me.

It's useless arguing then but I will just ask, you realize the reasons those 2 guys rarely see the ice are very different, right? And that over the balance of the season, 1 guy will continue to rarely see the ice and the other guy will play significant minutes?

 

[Crede777]

Hmmmmm we traded away a guy that barely saw the ice this season, in return we got a guy that barely sees the ice and a 2nd round pick. Seems like a good trade to me.

It's not nearly that black and white. Gaborik at least had the potential to help us this season which is the ultimate priority for a team in playoff contention at the TDL. There is 0 chance Frattin or the 2nd help us. And giving up on any potentially positive thing for the team at the trade deadline is certainly not worth it if we're talking about Frattin and a 2nd.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

It's pretty easy to play the what if game, questioning how our playoff push would happen if Gaborik was still here. Well, what if he got injured two games after the deadline and missed the rest of the season? Then people would be *****ing about how he's obviously injury prone and we should've gotten some value out of him while we had the chance.

No no no no no. This is the second time someone has posted this BS in the last day.

I'm tired of posts that claim "people" want this but if something went wrong "people" would want something else. It's a damn false equivalency. The "people" you're talking about are two different batches of folks.

Anyone who wanted Gabby to stay the season would chalk his injury or lack of production up to the chance you take. Anyone *****ing about how we should've gotten some value already wanted him traded.

Everytime someone ascribes an opinion to "people" or "this board" or "95 percent of you" it makes us all dumber.

 

[pete goegan]

None of us even knows what the return for Gaborik is because the parameters of the trade are so bizarre and convoluted.

Here's how I understand it, and there's no guarantee that it's right.

Gaborik was traded to Los Angeles for Frattin, a 2014 or 2015 2nd-rounder (Pick #1), and a 2014 or 2015 conditional 2nd- or 3rd-rounder (Pick #2).

Pick #2 becomes a 2nd-rounder if Los Angeles makes the second round of the playoffs OR re-signs Gaborik, otherwise it's a 3rd-rounder. The actual terminology for "re-signs" isn't known; if he hits UFA status and then signs with Los Angeles, I don't know if that counts as "re-signs". If the draft takes place and then Gaborik re-signs before July 1, the pick would defer to 2015.

Pick #1 may have been traded twice. Toronto traded a two-round conditional pick to Anaheim, and a two-year conditional pick to Los Angeles. The two-year conditional one is from the Bernier deal, with the Maple Leafs holding the option on whether it's their 2014 or 2015 2nd-rounder. The two-round conditional is from the Peter Holland trade, with it being a 3rd-rounder if he played less than 25 games and a 2nd-rounder if it's more than 25.

The problem with pick #1 is that the option is ultimately held by Toronto, then by Anaheim. I think.

I understand none of that, Your Honor, but I'm sure you do. Ultimately, the trade will be judged as all others are: down the road. Should the two picks (I'm disregarding Frattin) turn out to be NHL-quality players, then the trade will be viewed very differently than it is, currently. There's no way we can look at it through any lens other than immediate value, right now, since we're all deeply invested in how it has impacted this season. In the future, it could look better, it could look worse.

 

[blahblah]

Anyone who wanted Gabby to stay the season would chalk his injury or lack of production up to the chance you take. Anyone *****ing about how we should've gotten some value already wanted him traded.

Nice summarization; you cut right through the BS. You are correct; although I would say the 80/20 rule still applies here. 20% are just bat-**** crazy and wouldn't fall into either group.

 

[grindline]

Of the three main methods of building a successful franchise (trading, drafting and free agency) I would argue that our strength will lie in drafting. Looking at St Louis for clues about JK and JD it looks like the basis for their current success relied on good drafting. Furthermore, whilst Nathan Horton is unconvincing and questions abound about trading Gaborik, it is hard to find opinion suggesting our drafting last year was anything less than a success. As such I am happy with getting picks in return for Gaborik. Aside from who we could pick there remains the opportunity to use the pick to move up in the first round. I know that doesn't help us in the standings now but look at the longer term. I will be gutted if we miss the play offs but I have faith in JK and JD and winning a cup in the next ten years.

 

[blahblah]

Of the three main methods of building a successful franchise (trading, drafting and free agency) I would argue that our strength will lie in drafting. Looking at St Louis for clues about JK and JD it looks like the basis for their current success relied on good drafting. Furthermore, whilst Nathan Horton is unconvincing and questions abound about trading Gaborik, it is hard to find opinion suggesting our drafting last year was anything less than a success. As such I am happy with getting picks in return for Gaborik. Aside from who we could pick there remains the opportunity to use the pick to move up in the first round. I know that doesn't help us in the standings now but look at the longer term. I will be gutted if we miss the play offs but I have faith in JK and JD and winning a cup in the next ten years.

Reasonable response; although most are kind of tired of the long term approach. The long term approach hasn't paid off much; beyond gaining some respectability.

Picks are all fine and great. They can be used in a few ways obviously; we don't have to draft with them. There is better than a 50/50 chance, if we use them to draft players, that will never impact this team in a meaningful way.

We'll see if your faith is justified. I think they both have a lot to prove before they receive my confidence.

 

[Fro]

the problem is that we need to keep up the long term approach, while springfield is getting better, there are still many holes needing filled there that this long term drafting is helping to fix. will be interesting (and this may be for another thread at another time) if Chaput or Collins will be our next Derek MacKenzie next year...and who will be the next group to step up...

 

[Mayor Bee]

Of the three main methods of building a successful franchise (trading, drafting and free agency) I would argue that our strength will lie in drafting. Looking at St Louis for clues about JK and JD it looks like the basis for their current success relied on good drafting.

We keep hearing this, and have for quite some time, and yet St. Louis didn't find much outside of the first round either.

Kekalainen was hired in St. Louis in September 2002 and left in July 2010, so the drafts in question are 2003-10.

The following players were 1st-rounders: Shawn Belle (bust), Marek Schwarz (bust), TJ Oshie, Erik Johnson, Patrik Berglund, Lars Eller, Ian Cole, David Perron, Alex Pietrangelo, David Rundblad, Jaden Schwartz, Vladimir Tarasenko

The following players were taken in the 2nd round: David Backes, Carl Soderberg, Scott Jackson, Tomas Kana, Simon Hjalmarsson, Aaron Palushaj, Phil McRae, Jake Allen, Brett Ponich, Sebastian Wannstrom

And the following actual NHL players were taken after the second round: Lee Stempniak (5th, 2003), Nikita Nikitin (5th, 2004), Roman Polak (6th, 2004), Ben Bishop (3rd, 2005)

The other factor is that St. Louis had a huge number of picks to work with. There were 12 picks in 2003, 8 in 2004, 7 in 2005, 9 in 2006, 10 in 2007, 10 in 2008, and 6 in 2009. 2007 specifically saw three 1st-rounders, five total in the top 44, and eight of the top 100; they got nothing except Eller and Perron (both 1st-rounders). 2003 had 12 picks, with only three of them playing more than 20 NHL games (Backes, Stempniak, and Alexandre Bolduc). The only real star who was taken in all those years was Pietrangelo (4th overall), possibly Oshie (1st rounder).

It's not a stretch to say that the core of St. Louis was primarily built through drafting. But the constant narrative that there was this late-round brilliance, when there were five NHL players taken after the 1st round in nine drafts with a ton of picks, isn't really backed by the historical record.