Confirmed with Link: [SJS/NSH] Yaroslavl Askarov, Nolan Burke, 2025 COL 3rd round pick for David Edstrom, Magnus Chrona, 2025 VGK 1st round pick (conditional)

[ShagDaddy]

Winning is what matters. If a player was drafted by the Preds or someone else is irrelevant as long as they help the Predators win now.

Watching a draft pick get better in the organization is a cool side quest though.

The players that are unattainable via trade or free agency are 1C’s. The Preds aren’t going to ever draft one of those. The caliber of Forwards the Preds draft are attainable via trade or free agency so how they get their forwards doesn’t really matter. Fortunately they can develop defense they get in the later rounds of the draft to be solid NHL players so they don’t have to chase them by other means.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

I'm sure this has been mentioned, but I tend to zone out a lot.

One reason this looks bad on Askarov is because the path Trotz wants him to take is the exact path Saros, himself, took. He eventually earned backup right when Rinne signed a monster deal. He stuck it out for years as the backup and here we are.

 

[cjerina]

I'm sure this has been mentioned, but I tend to zone out a lot.

One reason this looks bad on Askarov is because the path Trotz wants him to take is the exact path Saros, himself, took. He eventually earned backup right when Rinne signed a monster deal. He stuck it out for years as the backup and here we are.

To be fair, I believe the only reason that Saros elevated as quickly as he did was due to the implosion of Mazanec as a backup.

 

[BigFatCat999]

Dammit, Philadelphia bloggers top us on the puns. “What’s the Askarov?”

 

[herzausstein]

To be fair, I believe the only reason that Saros elevated as quickly as he did was due to the implosion of Mazanec as a backup.

Yeah that almost 5GAA and .839 sv% is horrific but id also like to point out that we went into that season with either Mazanec or Saros as the options... Mazanec had a total of 27 NHL games going into the season and was also very young (25/26). Here Askarov is competing with an older much more proven goalie

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

To be fair, I believe the only reason that Saros elevated as quickly as he did was due to the implosion of Mazanec as a backup.

I don't think there's much of a guarantee that Wedgewood isn't going to implode.

 

[herzausstein]

I don't think there's much of a guarantee that Wedgewood isn't going to implode.

But unlike Mazenec who had very little track record, Wedgewood has been a NHL backup getting 20-30 games a season over the past 3 years and has an additional 100+ games of experience than Mazenec did.

 

[Predsanddead24]

I'm sure this has been mentioned, but I tend to zone out a lot.

One reason this looks bad on Askarov is because the path Trotz wants him to take is the exact path Saros, himself, took. He eventually earned backup right when Rinne signed a monster deal. He stuck it out for years as the backup and here we are.

Pekka was already a year into his big contract when we drafted Saros. Saros then became the backup in 16-17 when he was 21 and Pekka was 34 with 3 years left on his deal. The timing of the transition between Saros-Rinne was a lot more favorable than it is for Askarov-Saros. Saros did put up better numbers in Milwaukee than Askarov, but he wasn't necessarily dominating the AHL either. Also interesting is that Saros was benched during the playoffs for the Ads in 15-16.

 

[triggrman]

Trotz has shown he doesn't bow to threats, with Barrie. I'm not saying Askarov won't be traded but I promise trying to threaten him through the media isn't going to do anything but piss Trotz off.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Trotz has shown he doesn't bow to threats, with Barrie. I'm not saying Askarov won't be traded but I promise trying to threaten him through the media isn't going to do anything but piss Trotz off.

Yeah I think McDonagh and Afanasyev situations show he'll work with players if they'd rather not be here, but I don't think that means the process is going to be immediate. Trotz has clearly been trying to move Askarov but he's not going to just take whatever he can get. I actually think Askarov's refusal to go to the Ads may make it less likely that Askarov gets traded before the season starts since it likely lowers the offers we're getting.

 

[herzausstein]

Pekka was already a year into his big contract when we drafted Saros. Saros then became the backup in 16-17 when he was 21 and Pekka was 34 with 3 years left on his deal. The timing of the transition between Saros-Rinne was a lot more favorable than it is for Askarov-Saros. Saros did put up better numbers in Milwaukee than Askarov, but he wasn't necessarily dominating the AHL either. Also interesting is that Saros was benched during the playoffs for the Ads in 15-16.

Saros only played enough AHL games in 1 season to be considered a "qualified goalie" for their stats in 15-16 (rookie year). His .920 sv% is better than Askarov's .911 (22-23). That put them at 10th overall and 13th overall for those seasons in sv%. In 15-16, there were 11 qualified goalies with a sv% greater than .920. In 22-23, there were 5. Im not sure if scoring is up over that time by overall sv% have shifted in that time. But Askarov lands pretty close in terms of the overall field to where Saros did while playing more games.

Askarov still has some technical stuff that needs worked on where as Saros has always been more technically sound.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Saros only played enough AHL games in 1 season to be considered a "qualified goalie" for their stats in 15-16 (rookie year). His .920 sv% is better than Askarov's .911 (22-23). That put them at 10th overall and 13th overall for those seasons in sv%. In 15-16, there were 11 qualified goalies with a sv% greater than .920. In 22-23, there were 5. Im not sure if scoring is up over that time by overall sv% have shifted in that time. But Askarov lands pretty close in terms of the overall field to where Saros did.

Askarov still has some technical stuff that needs worked on where as Saros has always been more technically sound.

Yeah I mean ultimately I'm going to trust Korn and Vanderklok when it comes to goalie development given their track records. However, I don't think Saros was that much more impressive resultswise than Askarov. What Saros had going for him was that he just needed to beat out another young goalie rather than a veteran. We could have retained Hutton or brought a different vet in for the 16-17 season but instead let him go and gave the younger guys a shot at it.

 

[herzausstein]

Yeah I mean ultimately I'm going to trust Korn and Vanderklok when it comes to goalie development given their track records. However, I don't think Saros was that much more impressive resultswise than Askarov. What Saros had going for him was that he just needed to beat out another young goalie rather than a veteran. We could have retained Hutton or brought a different vet in for the 16-17 season but instead let him go and gave the younger guys a shot at it.

Saros or Mazanec both had clear paths ahead of them to become a backup and possible successor to Rinne. Askarov has an uphill battle to even become a backup and with Saros being young with a huge contract ahead of him - successor is highly unlikely. Askarov is being dumb with the threats to not show up to the AHL but i get the frustration. His pathway to the NHL for this and next season has been significantly narrowed. Sure it is possible but not entirely likely. It just didnt have to be broadcasted across the league. This probably just hardens Trotz's position who has already shown he is willing to send young fellas down to the AHL if he doesnt think theyre ready.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Saros or Mazanec both had clear paths ahead of them to become a backup and possible successor to Rinne. Askarov has an uphill battle to even become a backup and with Saros being young with a huge contract ahead of him - successor is highly unlikely. Askarov is being dumb with the threats to not show up to the AHL but i get the frustration. His pathway to the NHL for this and next season has been significantly narrowed. Sure it is possible but not entirely likely. It just didnt have to be broadcasted across the league. This probably just hardens Trotz's position who has already shown he is willing to send young fellas down to the AHL if he doesnt think theyre ready.

Yeah pretty much completely agree. I think Askarov is going about it the wrong way but he also has way less of a path to being a backup in the near term or a starter in the long term than Saros did when he was a prospect. Obviously the boss has changed since then but I'd also be interested to know what plan they sold Askarov on to get him to come over to Milwaukee rather than stay in the KHL. Real of perceived changes to that plan could also add to the frustration for him.

 

[Predsanddead24]

Pens just traded Yager for McGroarty. Not a completely comparable situation but nice to see the Jets could get a good return for a player refusing to play in the AHL.

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

Weber was 2003. Josi was drafted in 2008. Your point is still valid, but a bit inaccurate

Thx for the correction.
2003 was our best draft ever (1st draft in Nashville). Suter (7), Kline (37), and Weber (49). Those were the days.

 

[ILikeItILoveIt]

For the overall good of the franchise, wouldn't it make more sense to make Askarov the backup and see what happens? If he plays well, it's a win-win. We keep him and take the load off of Saros. His value increases regardless. If he blows up, it might change his mind about returning to Milwaukee. In the worst case, you move him for what you can get for him. There are other "Wedgewood's out there if we have to pick somebody up mid-season.

Trading him now for less than a first-round pick is a failure for the Preds, but it's arguably good for him.

Playing this "know your place" hardball is emotionally driven and counterproductive. This harkens back to the Rads suspension in 2013 during the Coyote series. That team was probably the 2nd or best Pred team ever, and we chose to discipline one of our best players in his final ELC year. You don't do that in professional sports. He missed a curfew. Fine him. Let him play so you have your best team on the ice. Deal with the fallout in the off-season.

I know I'm in the minority on the Rads thing, but I just can't let it go.

 

[jumb0]

For the overall good of the franchise, wouldn't it make more sense to make Askarov the backup and see what happens?

Before all this drama happened, maybe.
But you can't just give him the backup role now. That sets a bad precedent.

 

[Predsanddead24]

For the overall good of the franchise, wouldn't it make more sense to make Askarov the backup and see what happens? If he plays well, it's a win-win. We keep him and take the load off of Saros. His value increases regardless. If he blows up, it might change his mind about returning to Milwaukee. In the worst case, you move him for what you can get for him. There are other "Wedgewood's out there if we have to pick somebody up mid-season.

Trading him now for less than a first-round pick is a failure for the Preds, but it's arguably good for him.

Playing this "know your place" hardball is emotionally driven and counterproductive. This harkens back to the Rads suspension in 2013 during the Coyote series. That team was probably the 2nd or best Pred team ever, and we chose to discipline one of our best players in his final ELC year. You don't do that in professional sports. He missed a curfew. Fine him. Let him play so you have your best team on the ice. Deal with the fallout in the off-season.

I know I'm in the minority on the Rads thing, but I just can't let it go.

Well the downside would be if Askarov costs us games that we would have otherwise won and that ends up knocking us out of the playoffs or something. Or if he catastrophically fails and still doesn't want to go to Milwaukee then he has even less value. I don't think it's a purely emotional response either.

Also, as far as the Radulov thing goes we were 0-3 in games Radulov played that series and 1-1 without him with the second game he missed being Trotz's decision to stick with the lineup that won even though Radulov wasn't actually suspended anymore. Radulov may have helped but it's a pretty hard argument to make that suspending him is what cost us a series we would have otherwise won.

 

[Scoresberg]

Well the downside would be if Askarov costs us games that we would have otherwise won and that ends up knocking us out of the playoffs or something. Or if he catastrophically fails and still doesn't want to go to Milwaukee then he has even less value.

I've actually thought about this scenario as well and it just makes all the more reason to trade him before the season starts.

Say, you don't trade him and you get him into camp. He has an okay showing, but not enough to put him over Wedgewood. There's nothing you can do at that point to drive up his value, it will only continue to go down. "He couldn't even beat Wedgewood" is what they'll say around the league.

The only scenario where it would work is that he'd come into camp in a fantastic form, shot the lights down and beat out Wedgewood. But given how immature his playstyle still is, I find that hard to believe.

In all scenarios but one, his value is now the highest it will be for a while. Trade him now and let him be someone else's headache.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Well the downside would be if Askarov costs us games that we would have otherwise won and that ends up knocking us out of the playoffs or something. Or if he catastrophically fails and still doesn't want to go to Milwaukee then he has even less value. I don't think it's a purely emotional response either.

I also don't think it's a good idea to override your own talent evaluation process or potentially derail maximizing the return on a large organizational investment in a #11 overall pick.

What I mean is, obviously the team has been keeping very close tabs on Askarov's development. I'm sure the evaluation that he needs more time in the minors was not made haphazardly. Under management's scrutiny, he showed last season that he still needs to work on things. And if your hockey ops team agrees on that, I don't think you let the player dictate otherwise. And then on top of that, you want him to become the best player he can possibly be one day, you picked him with that high draft pick with those hopes. And if you feel strongly that the best way for him to reach his maximum upside is by following the course you've laid out (50+ AHL starts, Mitch Korn), then you don't want to threaten that by letting the player chose a different path.

Anyway, I think Askarov also poisoned the well. He made it about him, a "me" move, not something that you want to see in a team sport. I don't see how you reward a player who did that by caving in to his demands? I'm going to bet Phil Tomasino is not the least bit happy with his lot the last couple years, or Fabbro, or some others we've had in our system in recent years. What do they do it about it? The answer isn't to publicly demand a trade and declare they won't report. I don't doubt some of them might have privately asked for a trade. Certainly grumbled privately about their treatment. But end of the day, they kept trying their best to play for the team despite any personal disagreements with how they were being handled, and are following the rules and will potentially end up playing elsewhere under those rules. You don't mind bringing those guys to camp, they're still team players. Askarov broke a golden rule in hockey, I don't see the team identity welcoming that.

 

[Predsanddead24]

I also don't think it's a good idea to override your own talent evaluation process or potentially derail maximizing the return on a large organizational investment in a #11 overall pick.

What I mean is, obviously the team has been keeping very close tabs on Askarov's development. I'm sure the evaluation that he needs more time in the minors was not made haphazardly. Under management's scrutiny, he showed last season that he still needs to work on things. And if your hockey ops team agrees on that, I don't think you let the player dictate otherwise. And then on top of that, you want him to become the best player he can possibly be one day, you picked him with that high draft pick with those hopes. And if you feel strongly that the best way for him to reach his maximum upside is by following the course you've laid out (50+ AHL starts, Mitch Korn), then you don't want to threaten that by letting the player chose a different path.

Anyway, I think Askarov also poisoned the well. He made it about him, a "me" move, not something that you want to see in a team sport. I don't see how you reward a player who did that by caving in to his demands? I'm going to bet Phil Tomasino is not the least bit happy with his lot the last couple years, or Fabbro, or some others we've had in our system in recent years. What do they do it about it? The answer isn't to publicly demand a trade and declare they won't report. I don't doubt some of them might have privately asked for a trade. Certainly grumbled privately about their treatment. But end of the day, they kept trying their best to play for the team despite any personal disagreements with how they were being handled, and are following the rules and will potentially end up playing elsewhere under those rules. You don't mind bringing those guys to camp, they're still team players. Askarov broke a golden rule in hockey, I don't see the team identity welcoming that.

I also feel like Askarov has jumped the gun here. Trotz has said it's an open competition for the backup role in camp and, while I don't necessarily believe that's 100% true, Askarov should have at least shown up and seen if he could beat out Wedgewood in camp. If at the end of camp they try to send him down then I think Askarov could make some argument about how he performed better than Wedgewood and then refuse to report, but to preemptively threaten not reporting is just goofy.

 

[Softball99]

Still misguided but... I think it's about the $80,000 not the NHL playing time. Wedgewood was the slap in the face, he has no arbitration rights and 80g's aint shit in todays world especially considering what they spend to maintain optimum health. He's not handling it well, even national rags are saying it's a mistake(Hockey News I think). Stastney's deal was probably the trigger lol, I get the financial side of it though

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Still misguided but... I think it's about the $80,000 not the NHL playing time. Wedgewood was the slap in the face, he has no arbitration rights and 80g's aint shit in todays world especially considering what they spend to maintain optimum health. He's not handling it well, even national rags are saying it's a mistake(Hockey News I think). Stastney's deal was probably the trigger lol, I get the financial side of it though

He made about $200k last year. Maybe still not ideal, but he did get a $92,500 signing bonus and around $30,000 for his callup time with the Preds on top of the $80k AHL salary. I suspect he would have had even more time in callups the coming season, so probably would have made at least $300k.

Anyway, it's a lot better than the $0 he's currently looking at. If he wanted more money, he needed to play to earn it. Playing out his ELC for $300k and then becoming a restricted free agent next summer was his ticket to making more money, not sitting and being suspended.

 

[OldScool]

I also don't think it's a good idea to override your own talent evaluation process or potentially derail maximizing the return on a large organizational investment in a #11 overall pick.

What I mean is, obviously the team has been keeping very close tabs on Askarov's development. I'm sure the evaluation that he needs more time in the minors was not made haphazardly. Under management's scrutiny, he showed last season that he still needs to work on things. And if your hockey ops team agrees on that, I don't think you let the player dictate otherwise. And then on top of that, you want him to become the best player he can possibly be one day, you picked him with that high draft pick with those hopes. And if you feel strongly that the best way for him to reach his maximum upside is by following the course you've laid out (50+ AHL starts, Mitch Korn), then you don't want to threaten that by letting the player chose a different path.

Anyway, I think Askarov also poisoned the well. He made it about him, a "me" move, not something that you want to see in a team sport. I don't see how you reward a player who did that by caving in to his demands? I'm going to bet Phil Tomasino is not the least bit happy with his lot the last couple years, or Fabbro, or some others we've had in our system in recent years. What do they do it about it? The answer isn't to publicly demand a trade and declare they won't report. I don't doubt some of them might have privately asked for a trade. Certainly grumbled privately about their treatment. But end of the day, they kept trying their best to play for the team despite any personal disagreements with how they were being handled, and are following the rules and will potentially end up playing elsewhere under those rules. You don't mind bringing those guys to camp, they're still team players. Askarov broke a golden rule in hockey, I don't see the team identity welcoming that.

Well put....

Last season:
Askarov had a 2.33 GAA and a .921 first half of season.
Askarov had a 2.81 GAA and a .901 second half of season.
He regressed by .48 GAA and dropped .19 in save percentage

Obviously hockey ops saw things that need improvement. Goalies really need to be a finished product when playing in the NHL and he is super talented goalie but needs development still.