Would you be open to trading unprotected 2025 1st?
- Thread starter ViD
- Start date
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Far too soon to know. I went ahead and voted my inclination, but I think the far safer move is to hold on to it and delay any move decisions until the picture is clearer.
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,745
- 26,807
Cowumbus
Registered User
i think they should trade their first with top 3 protection (and add to it) if they can net a potential core player. they're primed to make big improvements over the summer with all the cap space, and the youngsters are showing improvement.
unprotected? no. the top of the draft has the next jack hughes in hagens and a tkachuk clone in martone.
my dream scenario is jiricek + our 2025 1st with minimal protections for noah dobson, then winning the lotto to keep the pick and walking away with martone.
unprotected? no. the top of the draft has the next jack hughes in hagens and a tkachuk clone in martone.
my dream scenario is jiricek + our 2025 1st with minimal protections for noah dobson, then winning the lotto to keep the pick and walking away with martone.
ThisIsMyAlibi
Fan of the worst organization in the NHL
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,446
- 92
No way I trade the pick for anything realistically on offer other than a chance to move up for a better player. Realistically, We have significant holes opening up/on the roster that still need filled. Fantilli has been disappointing and Lindstrom is a lottery ticket at best considering the injury on top of the normal rookie question marks so down the middle is a coin flip for being solved at best. It looks like Jiricek is much less a sure thing than we hoped for and appears to not have a long happy future here based on the constant rumors of discontent. Mateychuk hasn't played an NHL game. So the D is as big of a question mark as ever. Frankly, every one of our marquee prospects since 2021 is at least behind the development power curve and maybe so fraught with issues their ceilings have been permanently lowered. Imo, at this point we are still looking at a roster that has big talent gaps that need to be filled as our development progression seems to have stalled out and we appear to potentially still have a bare cabinet when it comes to top line/top pair players. Hopefully with some development luck and a couple more top 3 picks we can actually put together a winning team in a few years.
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 9,167
- 7,252
I say no just because there is a good possibility that last year's pick may never pan out and was a bigger risk than we were led to believe.
You’re saying none of our picks are developing perfectly yet we still need to collect more prospects ?
i would trade it if we get a game changer ( Jack Eichel, Marner, Brady ) in return. i think this team is closer then everyone is giving them credit for.
Jovavic
Concept of a Plan
Top 5 or so look solid but if we end up outside of that I'd love to trade it for an established player
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,446
- 92
In effect yes. Unfortunately, the NHL is in effect a lottery, particularly for us. Teams have to find our superstar(s) in the draft. Every cup winner of the last 20 years (with few exceptions) has effectively been built on a set of home run lottery Picks (Pens, Caps, Hawks, Lightning, Panthers) or an extremely deep and well developed set of homegrown prospects that outperformed their draft slot (Blues, Kings, Bruins).
Unfortunately, we have a crap scouting and development method as an organization, which hopefully we new management will improve. However, until that changes and is sustainable we need to keep picking lottery tickets because we have to hope a few of these hit and turn into a core that can actually be built around.
I absolutely keep/take the pick and hope it's high as possible.
Even when drafts are considered weak, and I don't believe this one is, there are always blue chippers at the top, and it doesn't always translate in a predictable manner after the draft (see any prospect pipeline rankings from last few years, or just try to remember how you felt about our prospects at the beginning of last season). If we could add another prospect at the top of our pool with the potential to be an elite player, I do it, because I'm not sure who the clear-cut, long term, top line or top pairing guys are on this team going forward yet - there definitely isn't a full starting lineup full of obvious championship-level stars.
While there is obviously a need to add veteran stars to insulate the prospects, I would prefer it be done through free agency or trade of more established assets rather than giving up on a potential top prospect. I would rather see the team spend big this summer on 2-3 UFAs or pull a reverse-Laine type trade with a team needing relief. When July 1 hits, there will be $40M+ to spend.
Even when drafts are considered weak, and I don't believe this one is, there are always blue chippers at the top, and it doesn't always translate in a predictable manner after the draft (see any prospect pipeline rankings from last few years, or just try to remember how you felt about our prospects at the beginning of last season). If we could add another prospect at the top of our pool with the potential to be an elite player, I do it, because I'm not sure who the clear-cut, long term, top line or top pairing guys are on this team going forward yet - there definitely isn't a full starting lineup full of obvious championship-level stars.
While there is obviously a need to add veteran stars to insulate the prospects, I would prefer it be done through free agency or trade of more established assets rather than giving up on a potential top prospect. I would rather see the team spend big this summer on 2-3 UFAs or pull a reverse-Laine type trade with a team needing relief. When July 1 hits, there will be $40M+ to spend.
JacketFanInFL
Brick by Brick
Panthers traded for sam rainheart, matt tkachuk, montour and gudas. we have all the homegrown talent we need the difference makers.
if we has sam and matt with our roster we are a playoff team allday long
that panthers team only had like three homegrown players (barkov, ekblad, lundell).
barkov is obviously the engine that runs that team, but the rest of their major contributors were, for the most part, trade acquisitions (tkachuk, reinhart, bennett, montour) or reclamation guys who they had open ice time for (verhaeghe, forsling).
of the guys they traded for, all but tkachuk were buy-low acquisitions. vegas followed a similar blueprint – extract value from unlikely sources, then take big swings for stars.
the blueprint for rebuilding used to be "accumulate top-10 picks + hope they develop" – that's not the most efficient way to build a contender anymore. there are good players out there who can be had for cheap, but teams need open ice time to extract value.
i think on some level they still need to figure out who some of these young guys are, but they absolutely should be aggressive to pursue core pieces who they don't need to develop. they can move multiple pieces to get a top-of-the-lineup guy, then backfill with a buy-low or reclamation guy. that's the most efficient way to build a contender.
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,446
- 92
The also had Barkov and Ekblad originally, plus that set of trades is an extremely rare case of buying low on distressed assets. Throw in Florida's lack of state taxes and its a very difficult model to recreate.
Capitals did it this year.
we are lucky we have so many prospect, but i think we have too many to develop productively
Yeah Im against trading it. I honestly don’t think we have that good of a pipeline if I’m asked to look ahead and make a prediction about where each guy ends up slotting in the NHL realistically. We talk about having major pieces but under Jarmo we didn’t see them develop all that well. Now we have new management. Returns on development under Don and Co. probably aren’t going to be determined for myself for a few years. Jarmo was terrible at trying to draft pieces that slot onto the roster down the road. I sensed he’s just drafted them because they were “BPA” in later rounds without determining if they made sense. However, Don came in and identified a clear organizational weakness: right shot defenders who can lean into defensive projections. He didn’t just grab one, he made up for lost time by grabbing many. That’s a win. No more of these random, undersized playmaker picks who, true, do typically overshoot their draft slot, but are next to impossible to project to an NHL roster, particularly when you keep drafting them over and over.
For example on high end / top pieces: Elick I don’t have current belief he’s a top 4 defender. He literally has problems with the puck on his stick. I’m saying this in terms of literally possessing the puck. He’ll fumble it without being pressured, he’ll totally misfire on pass attempts, and he won’t always make the best decisions with it. That has to change, because for as projectable as his mobility and physicality are, you won’t want him on the roster if he’s this much of an issue with it. Keeping in mind he’s a big physical skating RHD and he didn’t go in the 1st round. We know GMs absolutely covet these players so it makes me wonder a little bit.
Little bit extra to Elick and his puck handling. It was pretty bad at development camp. In drills, he was losing the puck constantly. Even would lose it with absolutely no pressure. Fumbled it in front of the goalie in one drill and scored an own goal. No pressure from “opposing players”
Our core should be built around Fantilli. Honestly, I think some of the current players who are good might just not be here when we finally compete because they won’t make sense age wise.
Don did go from saying "This is a 4th pick overall... we hope we're not picking this low again so we had to get this right" to basically saying we’re going to preserve our assets and we know where we’re at. Granted this was after Johnny but wonder if he realized in the process it wasn’t as good as initially determined.
For example on high end / top pieces: Elick I don’t have current belief he’s a top 4 defender. He literally has problems with the puck on his stick. I’m saying this in terms of literally possessing the puck. He’ll fumble it without being pressured, he’ll totally misfire on pass attempts, and he won’t always make the best decisions with it. That has to change, because for as projectable as his mobility and physicality are, you won’t want him on the roster if he’s this much of an issue with it. Keeping in mind he’s a big physical skating RHD and he didn’t go in the 1st round. We know GMs absolutely covet these players so it makes me wonder a little bit.
Little bit extra to Elick and his puck handling. It was pretty bad at development camp. In drills, he was losing the puck constantly. Even would lose it with absolutely no pressure. Fumbled it in front of the goalie in one drill and scored an own goal. No pressure from “opposing players”
Our core should be built around Fantilli. Honestly, I think some of the current players who are good might just not be here when we finally compete because they won’t make sense age wise.
Don did go from saying "This is a 4th pick overall... we hope we're not picking this low again so we had to get this right" to basically saying we’re going to preserve our assets and we know where we’re at. Granted this was after Johnny but wonder if he realized in the process it wasn’t as good as initially determined.
Xoggz22
Registered User
I would disagree that we have enough prospects. We have a lot and a lot of good ones, but if we're picking high in the draft, that's where your highest odds to get a potential elite or top line talent lies. I don't think we have enough of those.
That said, if the "right player" were available for the first, it would have to be someone that is coming into their own, fits the core age and provides an upgrade with long term fit. That's not easy and those deals happen at the draft. So... I think this question is premature as we don't know where we'll be picking and what level of player that pick might attract.
That said, if the "right player" were available for the first, it would have to be someone that is coming into their own, fits the core age and provides an upgrade with long term fit. That's not easy and those deals happen at the draft. So... I think this question is premature as we don't know where we'll be picking and what level of player that pick might attract.
