Trade deadline

[Porter Stoutheart]

Let Haslam take control and find out what his philosophy wrt to full-scale rebuilds is. If that's a direction he wants to go, Poile (or his successor) will certainly entertain the idea of trading Saros.

But in the meantime, it's obviously not a philosophy that Poile nor the current owners have. We all know this. Saros is the only thing keeping this team even within an imaginary hope of making the playoffs. He's not going to be traded until there is an organizational paradigm shift. And the earliest that can happen is what, 3 years from now?

Call back in February 2025, anyway. Maybe with Saros heading to free agency and some inklings in place of the new boss' philosophy, that could be a time it becomes realistic to talk about moving him.

Or if next season goes COMPLETELY off the rails and the team is even worse than this year, then they could think of fast-tracking that a little bit, say at the draft in June 2024, if at that time we have turned into a complete bottom-feeder independent of organizational preferences. I doubt the team will just organically be THAT bad. But who knows.

 

[nine_inch_fang]

Go back and pull up the transactions Poile has ever retained on. Then dig around and find the ones he took lesser returns on not to retain. That's your why.

That's "why we don't believe it will happen"... the real question is "why won't Poile do it"... what's his actual rationale for not doing it? The team saves money, saves Cap, and has the opportunity to fill a roster spot with a better/cheaper/younger player... so what is the drawback? Just optics/pride/some sense of personal honor?

I understand the history and the tendency to extrapolate that to future dealings but this cap situation is different than ever before. The Preds wouldn't be having cap issues right now if it wasn't for four years of a flat cap. Poile had plenty of space figured in with an escalating cap but he is now faced with a rock and a hard place type situation that he's never had to deal with before.

What makes everyone so sure that he Won't retain on a player, given the cap circumstances, if that is the only way to improve the team? The way I see it, by moving one of the "unmovable contracts" he opens cap space to keep the RFAs and roster positions for players that are hungrier and possibly more skilled.

He knows the 3rd/4th line fan cannon fodder isn't what ails this team, it's the underperforming high dollar contracts, he's said it himself. We've seen these players under two very different coaches with basically the same performance and results, if the only way to move on and fix the problem is to retain then you retain and move on.

 

[Predsanddead24]

I've come around to the idea that Saros might not be a bad option to move if there is a decent return. I do think it's as simple as are we in a contending window, yes or no? Who can we move that holds real value if the answer is no. What purpose does he serve on this team if again, the answer was no.

I think my hesitation comes because the hopes are all on Askarov's development if you move Saros. Sure things are looking good now, but man things can change in a hurry from a development perspective. If you don't move Saros then Askarov's development is only frustrating from a draft perspective and you could turn your focus to extending Saros as his deal get's to it's end.

If you did move Saros it's also waving the surrender flag. Your looking for a stop gap goalie to probably split games with Lank until your long term solution arrives.

Agreed. I think exploring the option of trading Saros makes sense, but I also think waiting until next trade deadline makes even more sense. If we're sitting out of the playoffs again next year and Askarov has continued nicely in his development then it is a bit easier to rationalize moving on from Saros. I doubt the return on a Saros trade is all that different between this year or next too.

 

[nullednumbed]

I've come around to the idea that Saros might not be a bad option to move if there is a decent return. I do think it's as simple as are we in a contending window, yes or no? Who can we move that holds real value if the answer is no. What purpose does he serve on this team if again, the answer was no.

I think my hesitation comes because the hopes are all on Askarov's development if you move Saros. Sure things are looking good now, but man things can change in a hurry from a development perspective. If you don't move Saros then Askarov's development is only frustrating from a draft perspective and you could turn your focus to extending Saros as his deal get's to it's end.

If you did move Saros it's also waving the surrender flag. Your looking for a stop gap goalie to probably split games with Lank until your long term solution arrives.

I think a contending team that is in need of better goaltending would send a goalie back if they traded for Saros. They would slot in here with Lank. Giving up Saros would signal a rebuild, so you run with this tandem next season and then plan to bringing in Askarov after. Unfortunately the way this roster is built it is going to be very difficult to actually go rebuild mode if that would end up being the plan.

 

[ShagDaddy]

I understand the history and the tendency to extrapolate that to future dealings but this cap situation is different than ever before. The Preds wouldn't be having cap issues right now if it wasn't for four years of a flat cap. Poile had plenty of space figured in with an escalating cap but he is now faced with a rock and a hard place type situation that he's never had to deal with before.

What makes everyone so sure that he Won't retain on a player, given the cap circumstances, if that is the only way to improve the team? The way I see it, by moving one of the "unmovable contracts" he opens cap space to keep the RFAs and roster positions for players that are hungrier and possibly more skilled.

He knows the 3rd/4th line fan cannon fodder isn't what ails this team, it's the underperforming high dollar contracts, he's said it himself. We've seen these players under two very different coaches with basically the same performance and results, if the only way to move on and fix the problem is to retain then you retain and move on.

I agree. This flat cap for the past few years is going to force GM’s to start doing things they’ve never had to do. It’s already caused some GM’s to learn how to use LTIR to manage rosters and cap space.

 

[Armourboy]

I understand the history and the tendency to extrapolate that to future dealings but this cap situation is different than ever before. The Preds wouldn't be having cap issues right now if it wasn't for four years of a flat cap. Poile had plenty of space figured in with an escalating cap but he is now faced with a rock and a hard place type situation that he's never had to deal with before.

What makes everyone so sure that he Won't retain on a player, given the cap circumstances, if that is the only way to improve the team? The way I see it, by moving one of the "unmovable contracts" he opens cap space to keep the RFAs and roster positions for players that are hungrier and possibly more skilled.

He knows the 3rd/4th line fan cannon fodder isn't what ails this team, it's the underperforming high dollar contracts, he's said it himself. We've seen these players under two very different coaches with basically the same performance and results, if the only way to move on and fix the problem is to retain then you retain and move on.

I mean you can keep hoping for a duck to turn into a goose if you want. If almost bet on that happening before I'd bet Poile starts retaining and taking on bad contracts.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

He knows the 3rd/4th line fan cannon fodder isn't what ails this team, it's the underperforming high dollar contracts, he's said it himself. We've seen these players under two very different coaches with basically the same performance and results, if the only way to move on and fix the problem is to retain then you retain and move on.

Maybe it would help to specify these players?

It's only Johansen and Granlund we're talking about here, right? He's obviously not going to move on from Josi, Forsberg, or Duchene (and anyway, their performances aren't even that bad).

Anyway, you are preaching to the choir here. Sure, retain or buyout could make sense as far as many here are concerned. I have seen enough to believe that we'd lose nothing whatsoever (probably even gain) from giving their icetime to some combination of Parssinen, Glass, Novak, and Tomasino. But you tell that to Poile and Hynes. They sure don't seem to believe it.

And you kind of at least have to have that belief before moving on to the next step.... ?

 

[nine_inch_fang]

I mean you can keep hoping for a duck to turn into a goose if you want. If almost bet on that happening before I'd bet Poile starts retaining and taking on bad contracts.

Taking on bad contracts just to get picks or whatever stills seems out there. But, a "hockey" trade that makes the team better doesn't seem that outlandish all things considered.

 

[triggrman]

Yeah, I'm not really sure on ever taking on someone else's problems.



Starting this season, I my thoughts on Johansen was, "he's overpaid but we don't have anyone that can replace him" Now, I'm "If Parssinen can get better at the dots, he could replace Johansen"

I think Johansen and Granlund could both be replaced with younger players now.

 

[BigFatCat999]

Yeah, I'm not really sure on ever taking on someone else's problems.



Starting this season, I my thoughts on Johansen was, "he's overpaid but we don't have anyone that can replace him" Now, I'm "If Parssinen can get better at the dots, he could replace Johansen"

I think Johansen and Granlund could both be replaced with younger players now.

WE also can't be hypocrites and say 'I won't take your problem BUT YOU CAN TAKE MINE!!!!'

If Johansen is overpriced what would his price be? Duchene? Granlund? You say 'problem' I say 'need for market correction.'

Let's say a team needs the Preds to eat cap for a trade. How much for how much?

 

[ShagDaddy]

If they can find takers, I’d trade Granlund. I’d also move Johansen and would be willing to retain $3M of his cap. Moving Duchene is going to be a much harder trade to work IMO.

 

[Scoresberg]

Yeah, sure the top guys are underperforming but for a team that lives on depth scoring, Jeannot's 5 goals, Trenin's 6 goals or Smith's 2 goals ain't gonna cut it.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Yeah, sure the top guys are underperforming but for a team that lives on depth scoring, Jeannot's 5 goals, Trenin's 6 goals or Smith's 2 goals ain't gonna cut it.

This swing was a big difference in last years post-February meltdown as well. Well, except they tailed off PLUS the big guns exploded. This year, we have the continued tail off of the depth, without the additional explosion from the big guns.

Of course, Hynes has figured out how to fix this: scatter the depth players onto lines with the scorers, and any time a youngster shows signs of being able to chip in, bench him. That'll get us those goals back, and certainly not disrupt anything else in the process. What could go wrong?

 

[Armourboy]

Taking on bad contracts just to get picks or whatever stills seems out there. But, a "hockey" trade that makes the team better doesn't seem that outlandish all things considered.

I agree but he's not going to retain multiple years on a player to make it.

 

[Roman Yoshi]

Listening to Marek today basically imply Nashville is in a spot where the guys they want to move can't because their contracts are so bad compared to performance and then the follow up of the Preds may not be able to rebuild financially was really depressing to hear.

The tidbit that Trotz may be rejoining the org was interesting

 

[herzausstein]

Listening to Marek today basically imply Nashville is in a spot where the guys they want to move can't because their contracts are so bad compared to performance and then the follow up of the Preds may not be able to rebuild financially was really depressing to hear.

The tidbit that Trotz may be rejoining the org was interesting

Josi, forsberg, and duchene are all producing at or above career norm paces.

Granlund, nino, and ekholm are only about 5 points over 82 games off career norm paces.

Joey and McD are about 15 points over 82 games off career norm pace.

I think you could argue with a better performing team everyone but mcd and joey would be career norm pace or better. Now if the contract is bad, thats on poile.

 

[triggrman]

Yeah, sure the top guys are underperforming but for a team that lives on depth scoring, Jeannot's 5 goals, Trenin's 6 goals or Smith's 2 goals ain't gonna cut it.

That's true as well. Need everyone to contribute. Jeannot's and Trenin's drop off are crazy to me.

Outside of coaching, how would you all rationalize the drop in production from so many players in one year?

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

That's true as well. Need everyone to contribute. Jeannot's and Trenin's drop off are crazy to me.

Outside of coaching, how would you all rationalize the drop in production from so many players in one year?

I dunno, a lot of teams have 4th liners with 5, 6, 2 goals don't they? And it's not like we're paying out big money to those guys, either, so, outside of them having had waaaaaay better numbers last season and setting our expectations artificially high, does it really have to be categorized as THAT big a problem?

We still have the problem that some of our go-to guys like Granlund, Johansen, and Niederreiter are more like "middle-6 filler" than "go-to"... and of course that instead of trying to cultivate or evolve any new secondary scoring like we might have been able to get from Tomasino and Tolvanen, we instead opted to sprinkle more 4th line plugs in. That's not really extricable from the coaching problem I say.

Of course on D, we are also getting a lot less production from Fabbro and Carrier as well... even if they were previously just transition-type assists, something also isn't happening to let them get those assists either.

We're not supposed to be a high-scoring offensive team, hopefully looking at our roster would make that clear. The outbursts during our slide last season were the anomaly, not the norm. But we're supposed to make up for a lack of scoring with: defense led by a Norris level superstar + elite goaltending led by a Vezina level star goalie + size/physicality/"identity".

Well, and then there's the PP. NHL powerplay levels are through the roof, but we're 29th on the PP which is how a lot of teams get a lot of goals. Edmonton has 59 PP goals, 32 more than us. They have 59 total goals more than us, but 32 of that is just PP goals. But look, we have 24 fewer goals against than they do (there's our D/G edge). If we had a decent PP, we'd have probably won 4 or 5 more games, and be right there in a playoff spot like some of the other middle teams, instead of outside-of-middle-looking in. Last year we had the PP (6th, 24.4%). This year we don't. We have the same players and same coach. What happened? If teams have made some adjustment to counter our PP, or if our players aren't doing the same things that worked better last year, the coach should try to figure that out and fix it.

 

[ShagDaddy]

That's true as well. Need everyone to contribute. Jeannot's and Trenin's drop off are crazy to me.

Outside of coaching, how would you all rationalize the drop in production from so many players in one year?

The team had several players have career years last year and they managed to barely get into the playoffs and then get smoked in the first round. This year they’ve fallen back to their mean. Maybe it’s time to admit that these players just aren’t as good as the fan base thinks they are. Sure Jeannot and Trenin can be pointed to as dropping way off from last year but on any other roster, they are probably the fourth line (grinder, energy, heavy line. Whatever you want to call them) and wouldn’t be counted in for much depth scoring.

 

[wmupreds]

Jeannot was something of a mirage. Sure, he legitimately became more of a complete player than anyone expected and good for him. But thinking he was going to become a 25 or 30 goal scorer annually at 24/25yo after putting up a 20% sh% was always wishful thinking.

The problem I have with his game is that he's actually plenty good at scoring for a 4th line type player, but despite his hitting he's really been pretty poor defensively and at play driving. Physicality seems to convince people that a guy is better in his own end than he actually is. Ekholm for example is masterful at using the physical game in a productive way defensively but he rarely hits for the sake of hitting. Hits in a vacuum hold little correlation to winning games.

Anyway nothing wrong with having Jeannot around if he's cheap. Probably not a good play to give him term and $$.

 

[herzausstein]

Jeannot was something of a mirage. Sure, he legitimately became more of a complete player than anyone expected and good for him. But thinking he was going to become a 25 or 30 goal scorer annually at 24/25yo after putting up a 20% sh% was always wishful thinking.

The problem I have with his game is that he's actually plenty good at scoring for a 4th line type player, but despite his hitting he's really been pretty poor defensively and at play driving. Physicality seems to convince people that a guy is better in his own end than he actually is. Ekholm for example is masterful at using the physical game in a productive way defensively but he rarely hits for the sake of hitting. Hits in a vacuum hold little correlation to winning games.

Anyway nothing wrong with having Jeannot around if he's cheap. Probably not a good play to give him term and $$.

Ive pointed it out elsewhere but this team leads the league in hits per 60. I think weve sacrificed skill in the name of hitting. Even guys like jeannot and lauzon could back off of the hits some and more focus on offensive contribution or more sound defensive positioning

 

[Armourboy]

So apparently the banter out there is Fabbro is going to get moved. Things have gotten bad enough that they have made me agree with Jared Stillman of all people. How many first round picks are they going to throw away because of a bad coach?

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Ive pointed it out elsewhere but this team leads the league in hits per 60. I think weve sacrificed skill in the name of hitting. Even guys like jeannot and lauzon could back off of the hits some and more focus on offensive contribution or more sound defensive positioning

And fights. There's no need for a guy that scored 20 last year to lead the team in majors (by 4 over the next highest player). He takes himself off the ice far too easily.

So apparently the banter out there is Fabbro is going to get moved. Things have gotten bad enough that they have made me agree with Jared Stillman of all people. How many first round picks are they going to throw away because of a bad coach?

Just really short-sighted unless there's something going on in contract talks or otherwise we're not aware of. There is no more pipeline and we want to trade one of the 2 d-men under 25 we have? Makes no sense.

 

[Armourboy]

And fights. There's no need for a guy that scored 20 last year to lead the team in majors (by 4 over the next highest player). He takes himself off the ice far too easily.


Just really short-sighted unless there's something going on in contract talks or otherwise we're not aware of. There is no more pipeline and we want to trade one of the 2 d-men under 25 we have? Makes no sense.

I agree. The only reason you move Fabbro is if you can't get him to sign a reasonable contract. He's definitely going to be decent somewhere else and you aren't going to get that much for him to start with.

 

[wmupreds]

Signing Lauzon to 4x2 and then dealing Fabbro would be some very poor work