What's the point of over-emphasizing the roster's pleasure and satisfaction when all signs point to turnover and change?
1) it's clearly a below-average roster, possibly a bottom3rd roster in the NHL
2) there will be at least 2, possibly up to 7 or 8 new faces next year. Meaning 10-30% of the roster will be different
3) there are big holes in big-TOI roles, so whoever comes in will be a high-impact player and have a big impact in the new roster
the upside I can think of is the team culture continues to be reinforced. I hope it does.
What 7 or 8 players? You're out to lunch, IMO.
With Anderson and Gallagher, plus Evans being extended, the fourth (or third) line is set.
With Heineman and Beck, there is one spot to attribute from the 3rd line and, even if, somehow, Dach or Newhook are the 3rd line C, there's still only one spot to fill.
The second line needs a C and, with Caufield, Slafkovsky and Demidov, there is only one winger spot available.
All of these spots can be filled from within -- Laine, Dach, Newhook, Roy -- but the 2C will probably still need to be filled.
IMO, a top-6 C and a mid-6 winger or two, at best, will be the spots available up front.
On the back end, there could be as many as two new RHDs as available spots, with matheson likely getting traded by the trade deadline next season.
At most, five spots. Likely, four.
Seven or Eight? Really?