Roster/Rumors/Speculation/Trade Talk - 2024-25: Re-Tool, Re-Group, Re-Mix, Re-Build

[leeroggy]

Rosner is hinting that Mayfield might be a healthy scratch for Boqvist based on the morning practice

 

[MJF]

I still prefer Boqvist over Perunovich.

 

[duster19]

I still prefer Boqvist over Perunovich.

He’s more offensive for sure. The problem with replacing one with the other is that Mayfield plays. Now you are running out Pelech Pulock Mayfield Romanov. These are not really offensive guys and I think Roy wants more offense/driving play from the back end.

 

[duster19]

Well, not everyone has keen senses. I'm the one who started a thread just before last season suggesting Brock Nelson could be an option to move at the trade deadline for an excellent haul if the team is not in a playoff spot. I'm still not opposed to trading him. I'm not sure where the jump from his performance at Four Nations leads to their being some offense taken or wanting Brock Nelson to be forever an Islander. You know they are not connected, correct?

His play simply matched my expectations during Four Nations, that's it. I noticed many people criticizing his performance and was just a bit baffled on why their expectations where high. I'm in the boat where if Brock Nelson doesn't want to sign a team friendly deal that puts him in the area where he can age into a 3C or even a wing, I'm not opposed to keeping him. If he wants to be paid as a 2c and long term, yes, definitely trade him.


Better? Hardly. Bad in a different area; correct.

Not sure I agree with that. Deangelo has been our best D since we grabbed him. Reilly was very good last year as well.

 

[xECK29x]

"okay, Mayfield was terrible"

 

[MJF]

He’s more offensive for sure. The problem with replacing one with the other is that Mayfield plays. Now you are running out Pelech Pulock Mayfield Romanov. These are not really offensive guys and I think Roy wants more offense/driving play from the back end.

I think Mayfield’s going to sit tonight. He only played 10 minutes against Dallas.

 

[leeroggy]

I wonder if it makes sense to make a lateral move with Detroit, to facilitate getting Mayfield off the books.

Something like

Mayfield and Palmieri for Tarasenko and Holl

Buy out Holl after the season and one year left of Tarasenko, who could play 3rd line next year and maybe gets us an asset next year. Holmstrom or Tsyp replace Palms on the 2nd line.

Detroit gets an upgrade for their playoff run in Palms over Tank, who only has 7 goals in 55 games.

 

[IslesNorway]

Rosner is hinting that Mayfield might be a healthy scratch for Boqvist based on the morning practice

Aren't we luck y to have him for another six years??

 

[Throttle]

Aren't we luck y to have him for another six years??

That’s not a hard contract to get rid of. He’s definitely a playoff-type defenseman. A contender takes on 2-3 years of it, from there, he sticks around, gets traded, or gets bought out.

Some teams that want some jam in the playoffs would want a guy like that.

 

[impaaaaaact]

Mayfield might be the odd man out when Dobson is back. I don’t think Roy wants to take out Perunovich or Deangelo

 

[MJF]

That’s not a hard contract to get rid of. He’s definitely a playoff-type defenseman. A contender takes on 2-3 years of it, from there, he sticks around, gets traded, or gets bought out.

Some teams that want some jam in the playoffs would want a guy like that.

The idea is not to sign guys to ridiculous contracts that make them a buyout candidate after 1 year. It’s bad business.

Mayfield might be the odd man out when Dobson is back. I don’t think Roy wants to take out Perunovich or Deangelo

I don’t get the love for Perunovich. He’s Aho 2.1

 

[Throttle]

The idea is not to sign guys to ridiculous contracts that make them a buyout candidate after 1 year. It’s bad business.


I don’t get the love for Perunovich. He’s Aho 2.1

Mayfield isn’t a buyout candidate. Roy wants to play a different style that’s not really suited for him.

Now, Lou brought in some offensive-minded guys that Roy (now desperate…) wants to run with them, to the extent they suck it up defensively.

I understand the reason for retaining Mayfield, looks like Lou went a bit too cute that summer with Mayfield and Engvall.

 

[Richie Daggers Crime]

I understand the reason for retaining Mayfield, looks like Lou went a bit too cute that summer with Mayfield and Engvall.

The issue isn't really what he did, but why.

 

[PK Cronin]

I know an Island for you Elias

Is it Long or Robidas?

 

[periferal]

I see I might be adding fuel to the flame but the truth of the matter is, every team to have won 2 or more cups in the past 15 years has had a self-drafted #1 star center, another self-drafted star forward, a self-drafted star Dman, and in most cases, a self-drafted SC-winning goalie, at least for one of the Cups.

Sticking with the importance of the self-drafted star forwards and Dman, one-Cup winners Capitals, Avelanche, and Panthers (granted Huberdeau was swapped for Tkachuk first) have certainly fit that bill as well.

The special exceptions seem to have been Vegas and St. Louis.

All certainly added key components from the outside along the way. That can't be denied. Certainly not.

But within the industry, it is more or less understood that the blueprint for winning multiple Cups in the modern era requires a minimum of 2 self-drafted impact/star forwards (one being a center) and a self-drafted #1 Dman.

Again, the multicup winners also each had a self-drafted starting goalie, at least for one of their cups.

***
Many teams have been trying to emulate this blueprint and have fallen short. There can only be one winner. But the teams that have multiple cups have gone exactly this route.

Without exception.

As always...Chapin is the (intelligent and informed) voice of reason.

To further on this debate of (high) draft picks being paramount in terms of building a (perennial) Cup contender/winner, but also how long that build could last, again let's look at teams that did it.

Here's a list of teams that did a (cover your ears) "rebuild" - Below you will see the first year they made a top 5 pick and then the year they won the Cup:

• Penguins: 2003 ---> 2009 (6 years)
• Capitals: 2004 ----> 2018 (14 years)
• Blackhawks: 2006 ---> 2010 (4 years)
• Kings: 2008 ----> 2012 (4 years)
• Lightning: 2008 ----> 2020 (12 years)
• Avalanche: 2009 ----> 2022 (13 years)
• Panthers: 2011 ----> 2024 (13 years)

If we average out those years the number is about 9.4 years from the start of a rebuild to winning a Cup. When you look at it like that I can certainly understand why many fans would not want to go through a "rebuild." The word alone is probably as dirty as "socialism" to some out there.

It would also explain why looking at the last 5-8 drafts and assuming all those teams who drafted high in them failed at their rebuild is such an incomplete way to look at things. We're now starting to see teams like the Oilers, Hurricanes, and Devils start to see the fruit of those older drafts...While newer teams like the Sens, Red Wings, and Blue Jackets are starting to profit of more recent drafts.

The reality is that rebuilds take years - And usually more years than even the teams doing them would care to admit. Given the reactions you get by some when you suggest selling off vets to be worse so you can draft in the top 5, I'm guessing a handful of fans would rather stay in denial that this 2025 Isles team can win a Cup because in the face of long drawn out discomfort, denial can actually feel like hope.

I wish we could just throw out the word "rebuild" and instead just admit that the Isles need:

• A new GM (and president)
• A new and younger core of 2-4 players more talented than most any player on the current roster
• Those younger/elite players are almost always found not only through the draft, but with very high picks in the draft. Thus would probably be best if the Isles really stunk for a couple of seasons.

If it makes you uncomfortable to use the "R" word then feel free to call that plan anything you want. Oh and we've already heard tons of times how "risky" this plan would be and how it "doesn't guarantee anything." You know what that's called...?

Life.

If you want to be safe then you continue on the path our current GM has us on, which ironically is more of a guarantee that we will never get near a Cup.

When it's clear that something is not working as this current "plan" isn't, then put me in the "risk taking" column. I'll happily take the risk that the next GM will be worse and that tanking for high picks will not succeed as opposed to running the GM and roster back next season with just one more "Engvall/Duclair signing."

Let's think bigger. Let's be bolder. Now is the time so we don't waste more of it.