Roster Building/Team Building/Future Trade/Drafting thread. | Page 103 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Roster Building/Team Building/Future Trade/Drafting thread.

If this team once again fails to proceed very far in the playoffs, what would you want them to do?

  • Do nothing, run it back

    Votes: 23 10.8%

  • Make changes to the offense, top 6 forward, better bottom six, but keep the core

    Votes: 14 6.6%

  • Make changes to the offense, including moving core players

    Votes: 82 38.7%

  • Make changes to the defense

    Votes: 14 6.6%

  • Do a retool, including moving core players

    Votes: 99 46.7%

  • Ban the guy who keeps making jinx prediction posts.

    Votes: 25 11.8%
  • Total voters
    212
Fogelhund said:
Why did Crouse have a down year?

Because the young players on Utah got better, pushing Crouse down the lineup. He had previously played with better linemates, and had more playing time. He had a down year from prior years, because he had less opportunity, because better players passed him in the lineup.

How does Crouse not only improve, but "significantly outperform" his contract... well for one, performing to his contract is close to 0.5PPG, while providing other valuable attributes. I'm not sure what exactly you are suggesting is "significant outperformance"... but maybe 55-60 points?

He's only doing that on the first line... which... ya, is never going to happen. He wasn't good enough for top two lines in Utah, he's not going to be good enough here... he's a third line player on a good team at best... so, you are going to get third line minutes, and third line opportunity. His good season, was 45 points... where he had 8 points on the PP, and he's getting zero PP time here. So, his best season, he was 37 points 5v5, playing second line minutes.

I think you are looking at a player, and thinking he's going to rebound from a bad year, without looking at why his numbers went down.

I like Crouse, I've always liked Crouse.. but you have to look at players, on bad teams, who have decent numbers, and then realize they aren't getting that playing time here.

A good comparison is Adam Henrique... he went from first line minutes with Anaheim, to third line with Edmonton.... put up 42 points in 60 games... which was nice, but then only 27 points this year with Edmonton... not because he suddenly sucks, but because when players move down the lineup, you aren't going to get the same points from them.

Crouse would be a third line guy here... 40+ points isn't attainable from that spot, without significant playing time on the Power Play, which he wouldn't get.
Click to expand...
He was also a new father this season.

The two Leafs who had the worst regular seasons compared to 2023-24 were Benoit and Rielly who were also new fathers. There’s something there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aingefan
Fogelhund said:
Why did Crouse have a down year?

Because the young players on Utah got better, pushing Crouse down the lineup. He had previously played with better linemates, and had more playing time. He had a down year from prior years, because he had less opportunity, because better players passed him in the lineup.

How does Crouse not only improve, but "significantly outperform" his contract... well for one, performing to his contract is close to 0.5PPG, while providing other valuable attributes. I'm not sure what exactly you are suggesting is "significant outperformance"... but maybe 55-60 points?

He's only doing that on the first line... which... ya, is never going to happen. He wasn't good enough for top two lines in Utah, he's not going to be good enough here... he's a third line player on a good team at best... so, you are going to get third line minutes, and third line opportunity. His good season, was 45 points... where he had 8 points on the PP, and he's getting zero PP time here. So, his best season, he was 37 points 5v5, playing second line minutes.

I think you are looking at a player, and thinking he's going to rebound from a bad year, without looking at why his numbers went down.

I like Crouse, I've always liked Crouse.. but you have to look at players, on bad teams, who have decent numbers, and then realize they aren't getting that playing time here.

A good comparison is Adam Henrique... he went from first line minutes with Anaheim, to third line with Edmonton.... put up 42 points in 60 games... which was nice, but then only 27 points this year with Edmonton... not because he suddenly sucks, but because when players move down the lineup, you aren't going to get the same points from them.

Crouse would be a third line guy here... 40+ points isn't attainable from that spot, without significant playing time on the Power Play, which he wouldn't get.
Click to expand...
I actually see Crouse doing well here. We have a massive hole in LW.

Crouse can slot in to either 2nd or 3rd line here and play alongside Tavares and be a net front presence for our 2nd PP unit.

All he has to do here is win board battles and get to the net. We have players that can drive play, that he can feed off of.

So there is an opportunity here for him. Is he the best option? I don't know. He's a significant upgrade on holmberg though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skullz and rumman
Duffman955 said:
So there is an opportunity here for him. Is he the best option? I don't know. He's a significant upgrade on holmberg though.
Click to expand...


That's the damn truth. But... if they are cap dumping, Evander Kane might be available.

He's cheaper than Anderson on cap hit, and only $800k more than Crouse.

I think most would agree, if these three guys are available, Kane is the guy you go get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: horner
Puckstuff said:
8, 2.25, 5.5, 12 with Domi moved

If Marner wants 13+ then it doesn't work, he can go.
Click to expand...

Why you want B. Tanev? Casper the Ghost in the playoffs.

1748469307221.png
 
Rare Jewel said:
It could, yes.

To me, if you actually want to both change the culture (moving 16, 91, 44) and also bring in quality replacements, you're going to need to dip into and move off of the two spots that seem "locked in," and that's goaltending and defence.

I don't personally like the D as currently constructed, so that's not a big issue to me. But goalie, if there's an offer for a good young D or a C, you have to look at it.
Click to expand...
I’m okay with the D minus Riley…….
 
Fogelhund said:
That's the damn truth. But... if they are cap dumping, Evander Kane might be available.

He's cheaper than Anderson on cap hit, and only $800k more than Crouse.

I think most would agree, if these three guys are available, Kane is the guy you go get.
Click to expand...
I thought the idea was to improve the team’s makeup, Kane’s a great player shen he wants to be, but I don’t think his off ice issues will help with the aforementioned makeup……
 
How washed is Pietrangelo?

Rielly for Kreider, Pietrangelo for Marner in a S&T could work, I guess? but a LOT of moving parts there.
 
namttebih said:
To be honest, the reason that I chose Nashville was because from the outside it's hard to understand the direction of the club. Forsberg, Marchesault, Stamkos, Josi, Skjei and Saros are all signed long term with NMC. (The irony isn't lost on me that I was attempting to trade 2 guys with the same clause, but it was meant to be a goofy thread) Admittedly the need for C wasn't considered. We can throw in a shinny Max Domi. 😉

All jokes aside, how do they plan on tanking when you have the talent listed above? The moves made on TDL didn't look like a team in full tank mode.
Click to expand...
Brunette already coached them to third worst in the league and with Trotz's approval of him I think that shows where we're headed next year. Trotz has spoken of needing a game changing talent since day one, hopefully we get McKenna.

Josi is on his 10-12th concussion and needs to seriously think about the future of his life, not just his career. Stamkos is a streaky PP specialist at this point. Saros has had two bad seasons in a row.
Marchessault spoke poorly of Brunette in the off season interviews, I suspect he's first on the chopping block. Skjei got exposed last season. Forsbergs amazing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: namttebih
Tony Romo said:
How washed is Pietrangelo?

Rielly for Kreider, Pietrangelo for Marner in a S&T could work, I guess? but a LOT of moving parts there.
Click to expand...
Not washed up but wasn’t effective as past years. At 35 for $8.8 with 2 years remaining will be tough to put on the cap.

NY Rangers need to trade Kreider to sign RFA as they are near the cap. Reilly at $7.5 million is a non-starter.
 
Soundgarden said:
Brunette already coached them to third worst in the league and with Trotz's approval of him I think that shows where we're headed next year. Trotz has spoken of needing a game changing talent since day one, hopefully we get McKenna.

Josi is on his 10-12th concussion and needs to seriously think about the future of his life, not just his career. Stamkos is a streaky PP specialist at this point. Saros has had two bad seasons in a row.
Marchessault spoke poorly of Brunette in the off season interviews, I suspect he's first on the chopping block. Skjei got exposed last season. Forsbergs amazing.
Click to expand...
Is it the consensus that it's Brunette's coaching or Trotz's personnel decisions that got them last year's results?

I was shocked O'Reilly wasn't moved. Then I hear rumors that they're interested in Marner. He definitely has game changing talent - in the regular season at least - but is obviously a winger. The acquisition of Bunting in the Pittsburgh trade and to only move up a round in the draft was also a head scratcher. This is what led me to believe that he was going to double down and go for a final run with this core instead of a rebuild.
 
namttebih said:
Is it the consensus that it's Brunette's coaching or Trotz's personnel decisions that got them last year's results?

I was shocked O'Reilly wasn't moved. Then I hear rumors that they're interested in Marner. He definitely has game changing talent - in the regular season at least - but is obviously a winger. The acquisition of Bunting in the Pittsburgh trade and to only move up a round in the draft was also a head scratcher. This is what led me to believe that he was going to double down and go for a final run with this core instead of a rebuild.
Click to expand...
On the preds boards it's a combination of both, I think Brunette isn't NHL caliber but Trotz's insistence in keeping him is a bad move if we want to win.

Ror should be moved out next deadline or hung on to for veteran leadership for no.5/McKenna. We needed warm bodies and Bunting fit Brunette's "system" more than Novak did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: namttebih
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 3 more.
    • Total: 46 (members: 14, guests: 32)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom