My experience has taught me a number of things:
1) "anything can happen" is fool's gold;
2) deals made from that flawed perspective tend to be bad long term decisions;
3) true perpetual competitors are built around young, all-star talent;
4) that foundation generally needs to include a true, PPG or better 1C, and preferably an offensive-minded PMD;
5) UFAs or even trade acquisitions who are brought in when they are older than their mid-twenties are not a substitute for the young, all-star talent;
6) "intangibles" are also not a substitute;
7) sometimes one or more steps back are necessary/worth it to acquire those players;
8) you identify that talent and lock it up;
9) if you feel your team is lacking in intangibles, THAT is the piece you add to the foundation, not the other way 'round; and
10) any player who doesn't fit the mold is expendable, no matter the emotional attachment.
If you don't yet have the foundation of the perpetual competitor in place, then you need to be focused on getting there. All your decisions should be made with that goal in mind, even if they are multiple steps away, and any move that doesn't point in that direction is a distraction and holds you back.
I think this team has some fundamental elements - Hank in net, McD on defense and, potentially, if everything works out, Kreider as a top line PF. They also have some other very good elements just a level below - Nash as a scoring winger, Stepan as a 1/2 tweener 2-way C, Zucc as a playmaking winger and PP specialist, Callahan as a heart-and-soul 2-way winger, Staal and Girardi as shut-down D, and good depth all the way throughout the lineup, both on offense and on defense. But they are missing that true 1C and, ideally, that offensive-minded PMD.
Because I don’t think they’re there yet, I think they should be working to get there and anyone not listed in that first group of three is expendable in the right deal to move towards that goal. Which is why, yes, I have a long list of people who are available, and it includes everyone who is currently an UFA. Of course you don’t move all of them - but you should be looking to make several moves from among them to get the missing pieces.
Callahan is the most obvious. Unless he is willing to take a significant discount (which would be the exact opposite of indications), he’s worth more to us as a trade chip than he is on the roster. You simply don’t lock up 7-8% of your cap in your third best RW who is prone to breaking down, especially not when that is the strongest position in your organization.
Girardi also makes sense, because I don’t think he fits AV’s system that well and he would have enormous value on the market. However, he’d be harder to replace, 1st pair RDs are hard to find, he has proven to be more durable and his demands seem more reasonable, so it’s much more likely they re-sign him. Depending on the deal, I’d be in favor for the reasons above.
Of the remainder, it all depends on the market and what other moves you’ve made. For example, if you can get a first for Boyle you move him; if you’ve moved Boyle, you are much less likely to move Moore; and so on. But at the end of the day, any move that doesn’t sacrifice one of the fundamental pieces and that moves you (either directly or by acquiring an asset that could eventually get you there) towards the ultimate goal is worth discussing. THAT’S why I’m here and THAT’S why I’m willing to consider a whole host of alternatives. It has nothing to do with "change for change's sake."
); if the player stays with the acquiring team, the return will be closer to what folks think would be "fair" value for the player in a "normal" trade.
