There are really only three categories of players I am interested in on the trade market, and that is (a) a trade in which we deal for a young center prospect by giving up D/wing prospects, (b) we get someone who is on a cheap contract beyond next season, either before or after retention or (c) we add a little depth by trading for a depth forward, 3rd/4th line guy.
Carolina is the team to beat from my POV, but its tight and small marginals can put you up against a number of other teams. With that said, to get all the way I think you must have depth all through the lineup, a lot of speed, skill, attitude, hard work -- and so forth. This is also a team game, which means that I think you must have a high level of consistency on the roster, and not a 30-40% turnover from year to year (these aren't strict rules, depending on your system different requirements apply, if you change one player against someone that is identical it has a lesser impact etc etc etc). I do -- not -- think that you must have a No 1 center that can score 100 pts, a No 2 center that can score 80 pts, a 1st line RW that can score 40 goals, a 2nd line RW that can score 30 goals and so forth. I.e. the old way of looking at how to build a contender.
This must be the goal. The underlined above must be what we aim to put on the ice. How do we get there?
Locking up a core of 10 guys that eats 80-90% of your cap is never even remotely going to get you there. I don't understand how people are thinking when they are suggesting that we should get some expensive 2C to play behind Mika or even in front of him so that he slides down to 2C. How can we manage to build a great 3rd and 4th line if we do that? How can we manage to get the right balance on the roster between altruistic team players that buy into our system and individuals? If we lock up every inch of available room under the cap in the top players -- how can we acheive consistency elsewhere on the roster?
Look at Toronto. You can't have a stronger core than they have. Just the last year and a half or whatever they have -- among many others -- lost Zac Hyman, Kasperi Kapanen and Andreas Johansson. Especially Hyman and Johansson came from behind and were great picks and developed well, but how do that improve the team on the ice? Can a team like Toronto -- ever -- beat a team like Carolina if they can't keep guys like Hyman, Johansson and Kapanen?
If we replace Strome with a ELC, we are a little better than Toronto of cap wise -- but not by bloody much. If we resign Strome or replace him with an even more costly C we are basically as bad if not worse than Toronto (their expensive guys are delivering more on avg than our guys).
How can it even be seen as an alternative for Drury to make costly long term commitments right now??