Proposal: Trouba Mega-Thread Part III

[lomiller1]

He sure as hell doesn't.

Yes he does.





http://www.tsn.ca/trouba-has-the-makings-of-a-first-pairing-talent-1.573828
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/6/6/don-t...you-trouba-has-been-getting-better-and-better
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/4/27/why-the-jets-don-t-have-a-left-side-defensive-depth-problem-yet

 

[GoJetsGo55]

Right but he's regressed cause reasons.

 

[Whileee]

Yes he does.





http://www.tsn.ca/trouba-has-the-makings-of-a-first-pairing-talent-1.573828
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/6/6/don-t...you-trouba-has-been-getting-better-and-better
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/4/27/why-the-jets-don-t-have-a-left-side-defensive-depth-problem-yet

Are we actually allowed to bring up these types of objective analyses in this forum?

It's hard to tell, sometimes.

I guess the only likely trade destinations are those with smart GMs that actually look beyond scoring rates to assess the value of defensemen.

 

[GoJetsGo55]

Are we actually allowed to bring up these types of objective analyses in this forum?

It's hard to tell, sometimes.

I guess the only likely trade destinations are those with smart GMs that actually look beyond scoring rates to assess the value of defensemen.

You can but it's less effective than cheap shots and "because I said so" rebuttals.

 

[Hunter368]

Are we actually allowed to bring up these types of objective analyses in this forum?

It's hard to tell, sometimes.

I guess the only likely trade destinations are those with smart GMs that actually look beyond scoring rates to assess the value of defensemen.

The funny part I've noticed is, the people who most commonly hate analytics are those same people try to defend/explain away subjectively why the "said" player sucks instead of just accepting said player from their fav team isn't that great.

 

[cneely]

Well, that went right over your head. Where did I claim anything was misguided? I just found it funny that when talking about Bigras it was an excuse, but when talking about Trouba you claimed it was misguided comments from others. The term "excuse" is used a lot of times to devalue a reason something happened.

Yikes. This is getting a little silly. We're talking about 2 different things. Pointing out that each is carrying around a boat anchor is an excuse. It may be a legitimate excuse (or reason), but still an excuse, ie. excuse these players for bad play, but they've each had weak partners. An excuse for both players, I am making no differentiation.

Pointing out that Trouba has regressed (and I'm not saying that you said so, just in general) is misguided. Is that more clear? I never accused you of saying anything was misguided.

 

[cneely]

That would be shortsided. It would also be shortsided to assume I'm pretending advanced stats don't matter at all. Just because they are misleading in some cases doesn't mean I'm completely dismissing them.

"Certainly they are not a piece of the puzzle"

Perhaps you could explain what you meant by that.

 

[Hockey 4 Life]

Would Gardiner + Connor Carrick be a good starting point from the leafs ?

 

[cneely]

Would Gardiner + Connor Carrick be a good starting point from the leafs ?

Not huge on Carrick, but seems to be in the ball park IMO.

 

[Hockey 4 Life]

Not huge on Carrick, but seems to be in the ball park IMO.

As a leaf fan I'd add a bit to make it happen maybe a 2nd and a decent prospect like josh leivo. So long as trouba actually was willing to play in Toronto.

 

[Stej]

Yes he does.





http://www.tsn.ca/trouba-has-the-makings-of-a-first-pairing-talent-1.573828
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/6/6/don-t...you-trouba-has-been-getting-better-and-better
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/4/27/why-the-jets-don-t-have-a-left-side-defensive-depth-problem-yet

I expect a few folks to ninja dust out of this thread after this post.

 

[Curufinwe]

Possibly, but for the Jets, Copp might work better (and maybe for the Flyers, too).

Copp seems like a decent prospect, but he'd be another forward to add to the four guys fighting it out for out last two protection spots: Weise, Raffl, Laughton, Cousins.

Do the Jets have a similar forward prospect who is exempt from the ED?

 

[lomiller1]

Would Gardiner + Connor Carrick be a good starting point from the leafs ?

I like Gardiner and I’m not averse to working something around him but I’d want a fairly significant add. Carrick doesn’t really help because he’d never get close to NHL in the Jets system, there would be just too many young talented forwards ahead of him. Value wise he’s a lot more valuable to the Leafs than the Jets.

Depending on where the Leafs draft next year I would do something like Gardiner + a 1st, but obviously the Leafs wouldn’t trade a really high pick. Assuming something around 10OA and/or there is a D-man we like I can see doing something like that. Something wouldn’t work right now but maybe after draft order is set.

 

[lomiller1]

Copp seems like a decent prospect, but he'd be another forward to add to the four guys fighting it out for out last two protection spots: Weise, Raffl, Laughton, Cousins.

Do the Jets have a similar forward prospect who is exempt from the ED?

This is Copp’s second year as a pro so he’s exempt as far as I know. He did have one game the season before that, but IIRC the cut-off is 5 so he should be ok.

 

[cobra427]

Trouba already qualifies for the first 2, so why would the Jets trade him for something that doesn’t fill any need when he’s really got no place else to go?

Trouba doesn't qualify for the first 2, you won't get that in a trade. The Jets had 78 points, not 108 points, they have plenty of needs and should take the best package of assets. The player clearly does not want to play there, that is the main reason you move him.

 

[Curufinwe]

This is Copp’s second year as a pro so he’s exempt as far as I know. He did have one game the season before that, but IIRC the cut-off is 5 so he should be ok.

I'm going by this.

http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion

That 1 game he played in 14-15 must count as his first pro season since he was over 20.

 

[Hockey 4 Life]

I like Gardiner and I’m not averse to working something around him but I’d want a fairly significant add. Carrick doesn’t really help because he’d never get close to NHL in the Jets system, there would be just too many young talented forwards ahead of him. Value wise he’s a lot more valuable to the Leafs than the Jets.

Depending on where the Leafs draft next year I would do something like Gardiner + a 1st, but obviously the Leafs wouldn’t trade a really high pick. Assuming something around 10OA and/or there is a D-man we like I can see doing something like that. Something wouldn’t work right now but maybe after draft order is set.

Connor Carrick is a young NHL ready rhd that's why I figured he was an appropriate addition because the jets are so darn deep everywhere else. I figured Gardiner + Carrick + leafs 2nd rounder would be close and would give the jets a top 4 Lhd and a bottom pairing rhd with very real top 4 potential as soon as next season.

 

[lomiller1]

Trouba doesn't qualify for the first 2,

One side we have
The people who’ve watched him play
The team, who have publicly slotted him in on the top pairing
The stats
Every stats blogger who’s looked at the question
All of whom say he is a top pairing D (at least)

And
You, a random anonymous internet poster who hasn’t watched him play who’s entire argument is based on repeating himself.


Hmm which to choose, which to choose...

The Jets had 78 points, not 108 points

Are you trying to suggest bad players get better or good players get worse simply because their team did well?

In any case, the Jets had good possession numbers, an even 5v5 goal differential, while getting some of the worst goaltending in the NHL and playing in the toughest division in hockey. Talent on the ice does not appear to be an issue.

they have plenty of needs

Not only wrong, at most position we simply have no room to add players.

The player clearly does not want to play there, that is the main reason you move him.

The only reason to move a player, ever, is improve your team. Players we can't even fit on our roster without dropping young talent does not make us better.

 

[lomiller1]

Connor Carrick is a young NHL ready rhd that's why I figured he was an appropriate addition because the jets are so darn deep everywhere else. I figured Gardiner + Carrick + leafs 2nd rounder would be close and would give the jets a top 4 Lhd and a bottom pairing rhd with very real top 4 potential as soon as next season.

Sorry, for some reason I was thinking he’s a forward. I’m still not sure he fits though. We don’t really need top 4, we need top pairing with #1 upside. We still have Buff and Myers and Morrissey for a number of years. Enstrom is in decline and I don’t know where he fits past next year but he’s top 4 as well. The big gap is someone good enough to either take over from Buff or pair with him to keep a good top pair as Buff gets close to his mid 30’s.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Yes he does.





http://www.tsn.ca/trouba-has-the-makings-of-a-first-pairing-talent-1.573828
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/6/6/don-t...you-trouba-has-been-getting-better-and-better
http://jetsnation.ca/2016/4/27/why-the-jets-don-t-have-a-left-side-defensive-depth-problem-yet

This list is from a guy who also tweeted a list with Joe Sacco ranked as the 9th best coach since 2007, based on one particular metric. Not sure anyone in their right mind would try to claim Sacco was even close to being good, let alone a top 10 coach.

I'm not saying that Trouba isn't good, just pointing out the major flaw with ranking players/coaches based on one metric.

 

[cobra427]

One side we have
The people who’ve watched him play
The team, who have publicly slotted him in on the top pairing
The stats
Every stats blogger who’s looked at the question
All of whom say he is a top pairing D (at least)

And
You, a random anonymous internet poster who hasn’t watched him play who’s entire argument is based on repeating himself.


Hmm which to choose, which to choose...



Are you trying to suggest bad players get better or good players get worse simply because their team did well?

In any case, the Jets had good possession numbers, an even 5v5 goal differential, while getting some of the worst goaltending in the NHL and playing in the toughest division in hockey. Talent on the ice does not appear to be an issue.


Not only wrong, at most position we simply have no room to add players.



The only reason to move a player, ever, is improve your team. Players we can't even fit on our roster without dropping young talent does not make us better.

If Trouba was as good as you think he is or your fan base thinks he is today, the Jets would figure out a way to keep him, make him happy, and pay him long term. The Jets are not sure, which is why it has not happened yet and why the player now wants to leave.

What I am saying is that 78 point teams have holes. Sure if all your young talent works out, you have zero holes, like every other team with young talent. Every team that had a disappointing season, there were not many with a 20+ drop, have things that went wrong, which of course won't go wrong this year. saying they have no holes and no room, must mean they are a lock for the playoffs, which they are far from.

We agree on one thing, the Jets only move a player to improve the team. Moving an unhappy player for a fair return of assets will help the team.

 

[North]

If Trouba was as good as you think he is or your fan base thinks he is today, the Jets would figure out a way to keep him, make him happy, and pay him long term. The Jets are not sure, which is why it has not happened yet and why the player now wants to leave.

What I am saying is that 78 point teams have holes. Sure if all your young talent works out, you have zero holes, like every other team with young talent. Every team that had a disappointing season, there were not many with a 20+ drop, have things that went wrong, which of course won't go wrong this year. saying they have no holes and no room, must mean they are a lock for the playoffs, which they are far from.

We agree on one thing, the Jets only move a player to improve the team. Moving an unhappy player for a fair return of assets will help the team.

The Jets value Trouba highly. The Jets aren't unsure about him.

He wants out. He says it's not monetary but usage.

There is a lot out there indicating he might actually not want to be in Winnipeg anymore.

There is nothing the Jets can do to fix that for Trouba.

The Jets are going to hold onto him until they get a deal they like.

 

[cobra427]

I told you where our hole is, the top pairing LD spot Trouba was in. Anything else is just an inconvenience on a roster that's already struggling to find spots for it's young NHL ready talent.




Let me get this straight, you think we should trade Trouba for a third line W to play in front of Kyle Connor because "it's possible Kyle Connor won't work out".



That has to be one of the stupidest ideas I've ever seen. How is Connor ever going to work out if there is no roster spot to play him in? If someone from the current crop flames out there are already a bunch more behind waiting for the spot. Marco Dano has scored at a 0.44 PPG (37 points full season) with 13 min a game and little PP time to speak of and he's going to be sent down because we have no room on the roster and you are suggesting we bring in even more players?

The Jets have potential, assuming that was what your Dano comments were about, but they are not that good yet, and there are more holes today than 1LHD. I predict Trouba will be traded in the next few weeks, for quantity, it won't include a 1LHD, and in any case, the Jets won't be 18 points better, which is what they will need to make the playoffs.

 

[wintersej]

This list is from a guy who also tweeted a list with Joe Sacco ranked as the 9th best coach since 2007, based on one particular metric. Not sure anyone in their right mind would try to claim Sacco was even close to being good, let alone a top 10 coach.

I'm not saying that Trouba isn't good, just pointing out the major flaw with ranking players/coaches based on one metric.

Came to post something similar. There is no magic stat in hockey that encompasses all. That being said, I do think Trouba is at the low end of top pairing right now with obvious upside for more.

 

[Stej]

The Jets have potential, assuming that was what your Dano comments were about, but they are not that good yet, and there are more holes today than 1LHD. I predict Trouba will be traded in the next few weeks, for quantity, it won't include a 1LHD, and in any case, the Jets won't be 18 points better, which is what they will need to make the playoffs.

You keep saying that the Jets need help everywhere but we absolutely don't need more forwards who would slot in with the bolded. We literally have 7+ lines of forwards and the only player that I would say is a stretch to be ready for an NHL bottom 6 role right now is Roslovic because he's just too young (obviously Laine is younger and Connor is the same draft year, but those guys are absolute blue-chippers).

Ehlers - Scheifele - Wheeler
Laine - Little - Stafford
Connor - Perreault - Armia
Lowry - Matthias - Dano
Tanev - Copp - Burmistrov
Lemieux - Petan - Howden
Peluso - Roslovic - Kosmachuk
Thorburn

Obviously more top-end talent works because we push folks down the depth chart, but the point remains that we have too many forwards!!! Adding more forward prospects in with the bolded players does not help us... at all.