Contenders in 2 years. multi[proposal]

[kloubek]

I like what Benning has done with our team.  I feel we are well on our way to being a contender again but there are a couple of areas that I feel we are still lacking.  One elite forward, and one or two high-end defensemen.  We really need only one if Juolevi works out but I factored in two because we're dealing with prospects, so you never really know how they will turn out.

Move 1:

To Vancouver: Nylander, Komorov

To Toronto: Gudbranson (salary retained), Goldobin, Subban, 2nd round pick, rights to Tryamkin

 

Why Vancouver does this: We get our elite winger to play on our top line.
Why Toronto does this: They unload Komorov’s salary, instantly improve their defense, and while they lose offense in an (slightly underperforming) Nylander they gain a nearly NHL-ready and potentially high-scoring Goldobin, add an outside chance player in Subban, a solid pick, and perhaps they can convince Tryamkin to come back for a playoff run.  I don't think Toronto is as high on Nylander as they were a few months ago.  Some may think we are still underpaying for an obvious top player in Nylander, but if you are one of them I think you may be underestimating Goldobin's potential, as he may be a first line player himself.

 

Move 2:

To Vancouver: Honka, Roussel

To Stars: Vanek, Gaunce, 4th round pick, 3rd round pick (From Stars)
 

Why Vancouver does this: We gain a strong defensive prospect in Honka.

Why Stars do this: They need scoring help and Vanek would provide that for this run.  They also gain an NHL-ready prospect in Gaunce and a pick, and they unload the underperforming Roussel.  Honka is not as highly rated as he once was, and so far has been quite useless in the NHL so it is a slight risk, but we wouldn't be losing much.

 

Move 3:

To Vancouver: Provorov, Filppula

To Philly: Edler, Granlund, 2nd round pick (From Colorado)

 

Why Vancouver does this: We gain another extremely strong defensive prospect in Provorov who is already in the NHL.

Why Flyers do this: Edler is a stabilizing defenseman they could use now (they have good prospects though), and Granlund helps give them another scoring option and has 2nd line potential in his own right, despite low stats so far due to a defensive role.  They unload the last year of Filppula’s contact.

Move 4:

To Vancouver: 2nd round pick
To  Avalanche: Hutton, 6th round pick.

Move 5: 
To Vancouver: 3rd round pick.

To Edmonton: Del Zotto

Both of these moves are to gain picks to suppliment the second and third trades.

 

Filppula, Roussel, and Komorov walk at end of season – they were just there for us to eat cap space and overpriced contracts to make the above trades happen.

Lineup in 2 years with projected point totals:
 

Dahlen* Pettersson Nylander - An incredibly talented but not particularly bruising first line.                                             65  85 85

Baertschi Horvat Boeser - This line is passing for our 1st right now, but would end up being our 2nd.                             60  65  80

Eriksson Sutter Gagner - While not quite good enough as a 2nd line, it's elite for a 3rd.                                                   40  30  40

Virtanen Gaudette Dorsett - Could easily pass as a 3rd line on many teams but we have it as a 4th.                               30  25  20
Gadjovich, Lind - Solid... if not spectacular "extras".

 

Juolevi Provorov                                            40    55

Tanev Honka                                                 20    45

Pouliot Stecher                                               30   25

Biega

Pretty much world-class top two pairings with plenty of talent to split for the two PP units.  Third pairing is noticeably lesser, but still really decent for a 3rd pairing.

Demko Markstrom            A potentially elite 1A backed up by a 1B.

* Note: This presumes Dahlen is the player I hope he will be, or that Baertschi doesn’t progress to a #1 player.  It also presumes that Pettersson is indeed our #1 center.  I think that we are on the favourable side of those predictions.

That, ladies and gents, is a cup-winning team.  Basically one of the stronger 1st lines in the NHL, with the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th lines all playing a line lower than that might on lesser teams.  Two fantastic defensive pairings and a third that is nothing to sneeze at, and an elite/high end goaltending tandem as well.  It's not a big, intimidating team but the league is moving away from that anyway and a team like the Preds showed us last year what you can do with skill over size.  We do have an imposing 4th line though if required.

Rip away.

Edit: I moved the picks we got from the last two trades into the 2nd and 3rd trade so people might view it as a bit more realistic.

[Guile]

That Provorov deal isn't even close... I know Philly has a lot of young D talent, but Provorov is a sure thing. He's like Ekblad or Seth Jones - near untouchable now. If I was Hextall I'd be asking for something ridiculous like Edler, Joulevi, Boeser/Pettersson/1st for him.

 

However, I like that first deal. Only issue is that Goldy may end up on par with Willie. We need to give him AT LEAST half a season in the NHL with proper usage before cutting ties.

[mll]

Per Bob McKenzie the Leafs have no intention of trading any of their three kids.  This is from an article he wrote last week on OEL to Toronto.  

 

https://www.tsn.ca/on-ekman-larsson-and-the-maple-leafs-1.920564

- Is it possible there’s been a seismic philosophical shift within the Leaf hierarchy as it relates to building a contender on the backs of their three young offensive stars - Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner and William Nylander? Because, make no mistake, that has been the guiding principle of the (Brendan) Shanaplan.

- I don’t believe the Leafs have, at this point in time anyway, altered their core principle that they can build a Cup contender, both from a hockey and a salary cap perspective, with the three kids (Matthews, Marner and Nylander) up front.

It did reinforce to me two things: 1. I don’t believe the Coyotes are at all interested in trading Oliver Ekman-Larsson; 2. I don’t believe the Leafs are at all interested in trading any of their Big 3 kids up front.

 

 

 

[HockeydownUnder]

The first 3 deals are all terribly unrealistic. You are trying to offer spare parts for quality prospects/players.

 

If someone offered you Kapanen, Leivo, Carrick and a 4 third round draft pick for Boeser would you accept? Because that's what these deals look like

[Noble 6]

Yeah, none of these are very close. 

[kloubek]

1 hour ago, Guile said:

That Provorov deal isn't even close... I know Philly has a lot of young D talent, but Provorov is a sure thing. He's like Ekblad or Seth Jones - near untouchable now. If I was Hextall I'd be asking for something ridiculous like Edler, Joulevi, Boeser/Pettersson/1st for him.

 

However, I like that first deal. Only issue is that Goldy may end up on par with Willie. We need to give him AT LEAST half a season in the NHL with proper usage before cutting ties.

To your second point, I agree, but that's the risk you take for a sure thing.  For some reason, keeping the Swedish heritage together seemed like a good idea.  As you can see, other posters felt it was total underpayment.

As for Provorov, I think your assessment is way overrated.  Boeser by himself would be overpayment imo.... an elite forward for a potentially elite defenseman?  I will agree, however, that due to him being a sure thing pehaps I offered too little.  But again, that's what the extra picks at the end are for... to sway the trades to everyone's liking.  

 

51 minutes ago, HockeydownUnder said:

The first 3 deals are all terribly unrealistic. You are trying to offer spare parts for quality prospects/players.

 

If someone offered you Kapanen, Leivo, Carrick and a 4 third round draft pick for Boeser would you accept? Because that's what these deals look like

1) I really don't think this is unrealistic.  Goldobin has very high potential and I am confident he will be a top six player and might even end up as good as Nylander by himself.  Due to the fact that is at least somewhat unlikely, they get the defenceman they want (Gudbranson), plus a solid draft pick and a couple outside prospects.  

2) Yeah ok I concede this might be underpayment.  I felt that Honka has performed SO poorly in the NHL that perhaps they aren't high on him anymore and would rather get immediate help for a cup run.

3) Again, I can see why this is viewed as underpayment and perhaps it is.  I figured that if we were to transform Filppula's highly underachieving contract into a more serviceable player while they wait for their young D to develop, plus provide them extra scoring in Granlund that it might be doable.

 

Note as well that in all three of these deals, we take back bad contracts in every one. Is there no value to that?

[Dekey Pete]

Add Raymond, Ballard and a 1st and you have a deal

[HockeydownUnder]

You call Boeser an elite forward and say Provorov can be a potentially elite defensemen. Pronorov already has a season under his belt in which he performed extremely well. 

 

Their values would be close but the edge would go to Pronorov for his year already put into the nhl and for the fact defensemen are valued higher than wingers.

 

There is some value to taking on a bad contract but unless it's a high cap hit at multiple years the return isn't generally very high. It also depends on a teams needs cap wise. Tampa could use some space but the contract they want to be rid of is Callahan's 

[kloubek]

1 minute ago, HockeydownUnder said:

You call Boeser an elite forward and say Provorov can be a potentially elite defensemen. Pronorov already has a season under his belt in which he performed extremely well. 

 

Their values would be close but the edge would go to Pronorov for his year already put into the nhl and for the fact defensemen are valued higher than wingers

Ok - so what do you consider an elite forward in regards to points?  A point a game?  Boeser has shown he has that ability, and he hasn't slowed down so there is a good chance he will continue being an elite influence. He's a 1st line player on any team.

Provorov does indeed have a full year under his belt which makes his stats a little more secure.  However, his first year he got 30 points, which puts him at around 50th in the league for defensemen - so that's top pairing, but just barely. This year he's on pace for 41 points which puts him somewhere between a 2nd defenceman and a 1st defenceman if he keeps it up.  If it is true that defensemen are worth more (which I don't doubt), then it seems about on par to me.  

[HockeydownUnder]

3 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Ok - so what do you consider an elite forward in regards to points?  A point a game?  Boeser has shown he has that ability, and he hasn't slowed down so there is a good chance he will continue being an elite influence. He's a 1st line player on any team.

Provorov does indeed have a full year under his belt which makes his stats a little more secure.  However, his first year he got 30 points, which puts him at around 50th in the league for defensemen - so that's top pairing, but just barely. This year he's on pace for 41 points which puts him somewhere between a 2nd defenceman and a 1st defenceman if he keeps it up.  If it is true that defensemen are worth more (which I don't doubt), then it seems about on par to me.  

Boesers sample size is still fairly small. I'd have a hard time trading him at this point because he's looked awesome but Provorov would be hard to turn down. When a defensemen is looking like top pairing defensemen at 19-20 years old that's usually a really good sign.

[kloubek]

9 minutes ago, HockeydownUnder said:

Boesers sample size is still fairly small. I'd have a hard time trading him at this point because he's looked awesome but Provorov would be hard to turn down. When a defensemen is looking like top pairing defensemen at 19-20 years old that's usually a really good sign.

I certainly don't disagree on either point. We all know defensemen take a while to develop, and you're right - it is entirely possible Brock may regress, but I don't think so.  He picked up right where he left off last season and has shown zero droughts so far so I think there is fairly minimal risk with both players at this point.  Will he have 80 points by end of season?  Tough to say - but considering he too is young and he doesn't exactly have elite linemates, I think his production so far is nothing short of spectacular.

[khay]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

I like what Benning has done with our team.  I feel we are well on our way to being a contender again but there are a couple of areas that I feel we are still lacking.  One elite forward, and one or two high-end defensemen.  We really need only one if Juolevi works out but I factored in two because we're dealing with prospects, so you never really know how they will turn out.

Move 1:

To Vancouver: Nylander, Komorov

To Toronto: Gudbranson (salary retained), Goldobin, Subban, 2nd round pick, rights to Tryamkin

 

Why Vancouver does this: We get our elite winger to play on our top line.
Why Toronto does this: They unload Komorov’s salary, instantly improve their defense, and while they lose offense in an (slightly underperforming) Nylander they gain a nearly NHL-ready and potentially high-scoring Goldobin, add an outside chance player in Subban, a solid pick, and perhaps they can convince Tryamkin to come back for a playoff run.  I don't think Toronto is as high on Nylander as they were a few months ago.  Some may think we are still underpaying for an obvious top player in Nylander, but if you are one of them I think you may be underestimating Goldobin's potential, as he may be a first line player himself.

 

Move 2:

To Vancouver: Honka, Roussel

To Stars: Vanek, Gaunce, 4th round pick, 3rd round pick (From Stars)
 

Why Vancouver does this: We gain a strong defensive prospect in Honka.

Why Stars do this: They need scoring help and Vanek would provide that for this run.  They also gain an NHL-ready prospect in Gaunce and a pick, and they unload the underperforming Roussel.  Honka is not as highly rated as he once was, and so far has been quite useless in the NHL so it is a slight risk, but we wouldn't be losing much.

 

Move 3:

To Vancouver: Provorov, Filppula

To Philly: Edler, Granlund, 2nd round pick (From Colorado)

 

Why Vancouver does this: We gain another extremely strong defensive prospect in Provorov who is already in the NHL.

Why Flyers do this: Edler is a stabilizing defenseman they could use now (they have good prospects though), and Granlund helps give them another scoring option and has 2nd line potential in his own right, despite low stats so far due to a defensive role.  They unload the last year of Filppula’s contact.

Move 4:

To Vancouver: 2nd round pick
To  Avalanche: Hutton, 6th round pick.

Move 5: 
To Vancouver: 3rd round pick.

To Edmonton: Del Zotto

Both of these moves are to gain picks to suppliment the second and third trades.

 

Filppula, Roussel, and Komorov walk at end of season – they were just there for us to eat cap space and overpriced contracts to make the above trades happen.

Lineup in 2 years with projected point totals:
 

Dahlen* Pettersson Nylander - An incredibly talented but not particularly bruising first line.                                             65  85 85

Baertschi Horvat Boeser - This line is passing for our 1st right now, but would end up being our 2nd.                             60  65  80

Eriksson Sutter Gagner - While not quite good enough as a 2nd line, it's elite for a 3rd.                                                   40  30  40

Virtanen Gaudette Dorsett - Could easily pass as a 3rd line on many teams but we have it as a 4th.                               30  25  20
Gadjovich, Lind - Solid... if not spectacular "extras".

 

Juolevi Provorov                                            40    55

Tanev Honka                                                 20    45

Pouliot Stecher                                               30   25

Biega

Pretty much world-class top two pairings with plenty of talent to split for the two PP units.  Third pairing is noticeably lesser, but still really decent for a 3rd pairing.

Demko Markstrom            A potentially elite 1A backed up by a 1B.

* Note: This presumes Dahlen is the player I hope he will be, or that Baertschi doesn’t progress to a #1 player.  It also presumes that Pettersson is indeed our #1 center.  I think that we are on the favourable side of those predictions.

That, ladies and gents, is a cup-winning team.  Basically one of the stronger 1st lines in the NHL, with the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th lines all playing a line lower than that might on lesser teams.  Two fantastic defensive pairings and a third that is nothing to sneeze at, and an elite/high end goaltending tandem as well.  It's not a big, intimidating team but the league is moving away from that anyway and a team like the Preds showed us last year what you can do with skill over size.  We do have an imposing 4th line though if required.

Rip away.

Edit: I moved the picks we got from the last two trades into the 2nd and 3rd trade so people might view it as a bit more realistic.

Trade #1: I think the Leafs want to build around Matthew, Nylander, and Marner. They are not going to give him up for a potential UFA in Gudbranson and a smallish forward in Goldobin, whose skill level is below Nylander at this point in time.

 

Trade #2: Vanek was signed as a UFA and will be a UFA next season. Teams do not like to pay premium for this type of players because they feel like they could have had this player for free during summer. However, Dallas may do this... if they have sorta given up on Honka and that they don't see Honka in their plans. But if you think he will get 45 points, I don't see why Dallas would give up on him.

 

Trade #3: No way. Edler is 31 whereas Provorov is 20. A 20 year old defenceman that is already playing 1st pairing minutes for a 31 year old player that is playing borderline 1st/2nd pairing minutes. Utility player like Granlund is valuable to teams but not valuable enough for Philly to give up 11 years in age.

 

Trade #4 and #5: Sure. But they don't make us into contenders. 

 

Adding Nylander doesn't make us much stronger up front; well it does make us stronger in the regular season I guess. I think if we are to become a true contender, we need Jake Virtanen or Jonah Gadjovich or a power forward to take up that top 6 role. We sort of need Milan Lucic type player to round out that top 6 rather than a William Nylander type of player in the playoffs. If Lind and Gaudette reaches their potential and provide scoring from the bottom 6, then that forward group will be able to contend.

 

And we need Demko to become a #1 goalie. That is not a sure thing yet. 

 

Defence, assuming we do not get Provorov is not good enough. Stecher, Tanev, Pouliot, Juolevi just aren't enough. I would say one more top end defenceman is needed for us to contend. We basically need to draft one in 2018 draft. Depending on the type of defence prospect we draft in 2018, one of Edler or Gudbranson should still be around to round out top 6.

 

[kloubek]

7 minutes ago, khay said:

Trade #1: I think the Leafs want to build around Matthew, Nylander, and Marner. They are not going to give him up for a potential UFA in Gudbranson and a smallish forward in Goldobin, whose skill level is below Nylander at this point in time.

 

Trade #2: Vanek was signed as a UFA and will be a UFA next season. Teams do not like to pay premium for this type of players because they feel like they could have had this player for free during summer. However, Dallas may do this... if they have sorta given up on Honka and that they don't see Honka in their plans. But if you think he will get 45 points, I don't see why Dallas would give up on him.

 

Trade #3: No way. Edler is 31 whereas Provorov is 20. A 20 year old defenceman that is already playing 1st pairing minutes for a 31 year old player that is playing borderline 1st/2nd pairing minutes. Utility player like Granlund is valuable to teams but not valuable enough for Philly to give up 11 years in age.

 

Trade #4 and #5: Sure. But they don't make us into contenders. 

 

Adding Nylander doesn't make us much stronger up front; well it does make us stronger in the regular season I guess. I think if we are to become a true contender, we need Jake Virtanen or Jonah Gadjovich or a power forward to take up that top 6 role. We sort of need Milan Lucic type player to round out that top 6 rather than a William Nylander type of player in the playoffs. If Lind and Gaudette reaches their potential and provide scoring from the bottom 6, then that forward group will be able to contend.

 

And we need Demko to become a #1 goalie. That is not a sure thing yet. 

 

Defence, assuming we do not get Provorov is not good enough. Stecher, Tanev, Pouliot, Juolevi just aren't enough. I would say one more top end defenceman is needed for us to contend. We basically need to draft one in 2018 draft. Depending on the type of defence prospect we draft in 2018, one of Edler or Gudbranson should still be around to round out top 6.

 

I am not claiming #1 is likely.  I agree they want to build around Nylander and such has already been said.  I was thinking if it helped them avoid having to give him a raise (which is going to be a challenge against the cap) it might encourage them to hand him over.

#2: Of course you are right - he is a rental.  But their time to win is right now and with Vanek having a decent season they get closer to that goal.  I honestly have no idea what Honka is capable of.  If he is as much a failure as he has shown so far then I wouldn't even want to make the trade.

 

#3: The idea with Edler is that they get a guy who is a settling force while their plethora of young defencemen develop.  I do agree with the strong value in Provorov though, and that would make it hard to give him up.  Perhaps we would be better to pluck one of the other defensemen at a cheaper price.

I disagree about Nylander though.  Assuming his slowdown right now is an anomaly, I think he is exactly what we need to play with the other Swedes.  With that said, I can 100% see your perspective that we need a strong, bullish player to help out.  Let's face it - that line is hardly oversized.  Mind you, they said the Sedins weren't give enough either and who did we give them - Burrows. And that was back when physical play WAS needed.  In today's skill game, I feel the kind of player you are looking for might not be required.  But since you believe it is, may I assume you are in the Kane bandwagon?  

Demko: Absolutely true.  I feel we have gotten good goaltending with what we have, but an elite goalie is always hugely helpful when making a cup run.  His development is important in any scenario.

Stecher, Tanev, Pouliot and Juolevi aren't enough?  Nope.  They aren't.  Which is why I tried to put the main focus here on a couple of high potential blueliners.  Even if Juolevi hits, we still need 1 more pmd imo.  I love Stecher but he's never going to be a #1 d, and while Pouliot shows promise he's likely a 2nd pairing at best.  So we're on the same page there.

[Silky mitts]

Values are way off 

[kloubek]

6 minutes ago, Silky mitts said:

Values are way off 

Then suggest adjustments to meet the value you perceive.

[HockeydownUnder]

Myers would be a defensemen I wouldn't mind getting from the Flyers. He may end up a casualty of their logjam of defensemen and would be had at a much lower price than Pronorov

[kloubek]

16 minutes ago, HockeydownUnder said:

Myers would be a defensemen I wouldn't mind getting from the Flyers. He may end up a casualty of their logjam of defensemen and would be had at a much lower price than Pronorov

From what I've read (as I know nothing about him at all) he's a big but offensively challenged guy.  That might still be ok and would help our size issue overall, but such a move would require Juolevi to hit, as well as us picking up a true pmd somewhere else.  And if that's all we wanted, I'd almost rather go after a guy like Borowiecki or Schenn.  Or, if we're sticking with Philly, Gudas.

[Zhukini]

Del Zotto for a third is the only one I could see with a chance. Maybe the Dallas one as well. 

 

Hutton would get a fourth right now 

[HockeydownUnder]

20 minutes ago, kloubek said:

From what I've read (as I know nothing about him at all) he's a big but offensively challenged guy.  That might still be ok and would help our size issue overall, but such a move would require Juolevi to hit, as well as us picking up a true pmd somewhere else.  And if that's all we wanted, I'd almost rather go after a guy like Borowiecki or Schenn.  Or, if we're sticking with Philly, Gudas.

Myers is only 20 that's why I suggested it. He isn't going to be a number 1 but he could eventually slide into our top 4.

 

Canucks have quite a few needs on the back end.  Time to start drafting some more defensemen and hope some work out

[underrated]

I unfortunately have to agree that the values are off.  They really are quantity for quality trade offers, which just don't get accepted by teams for their top young players.  I'd love to see these happen but apart from trades 4 & 5, just don't think Benning could get any GM to agree to those trades.

 

The Nylander deal really hinges on Goldobin becoming a top player.  Gudbransson is an expiring contract.  Really feels like a quantity for quality trade, and rarely do teams do that, especially with young players.  Sometimes you see those deals for veterans as rentals but not top young talent.  If they're going to trade Nylander, they'd be looking for a potential #1 d-man, not a guy like Gudbransson.  I agree Goldobin could be good and take Nylander's spot but he's much more of an unknown at this point.

 

Honka is Dallas' top prospect who is basically NHL ready.  I'd love to trade for him, and made a proposal elsewhere but that deal had a guy like Edler going back along with several pieces in a package deal.  No way they'd trade their top guy for an expiring contract, and more quantity rather than quality.

 

In the Philly deal, at least Edler is going back, so the value is closer, however I agree with one commenter that Provorov is almost in the Seth Jones type category.  I don't see why Philly would part with him when he's this good this young.

 

Overall, the Canucks wouldn't trade Bo, Boeser, Petterson, etc unless we are getting real quality back.  We wouldn't accept a package for them.  I don't think any other GM's would either, even though I'd love it!