Free agency or Trade???

[Tomatoes11]

10 hours ago, oldnews said:

You can't really answer a question like this not knowing:

 

1) what UFAs will be interested in signing here

and

2) what trade opportunities will emerge in the offseason.

What I think you can do regardless, is generate a framework of a plan you intend to pursue.

 

Identify your shorter term needs - and then assess what the longer term projections at those positions are.

 

For example, the team might need a top 6 LW to play with EP - or could opt for a center/winger to complement him....

It could also use another RHD in the absence of Gudbranson - one that could either fill a shutdown role, or play a dual role in supporting Tanev (to not have to handle the bulk of hard minutes - perhaps making him a bit more durable if they're fortunate) while also providing some two way minutes - perhaps ideally a guy that could anchor Hughes while also handling some larger minutes (pk, shutdown) at the same time.

 

In whatever case you're also looking at who is in the system - and who they're likely to draft at 10 (something they will know before going to the UFA market July 1st).

Presently the wingers in the system may be the least deep of ppsitions (not really a concern imo as they also tend to be the most readily available assest)....but before going out and signing a winger to maximum term/cap, the implications not only on future pieces at that position - but also the larger cap structure moving forward - have to be taken into account.

This is why I'd lean strongly away from the big fish wingers in free agency, regardless of the shorter term uptick they might provide on Pettersson's wing.    Another complication is the type of player that best complements him - imo a reason to again steer clear of a Panarin type signing - is the the EP line (with Boeser) - could use some size, forecheck and hard areas presence (and down low defensive support for a young, undersized EP).   For these reasons I'd target a different 'type' of forward - and in addition, when looking at cap flexibility movign forward (and imo the most important phase in this respect will likely be a few years in the future, not the present) - when you look at those factors, I think it's 'better' to target the more mid range forwardsm, ideally ones that are more versatile, can play up and down the lineup in due course (for me those are guys like Brock Nelson, not Panarin).  Like Panarin, Skinner imo is too (even more) one-dimensional and not the type of forward this team should target, in spite of the (isolated) upside it could bring (at too heavy an overall price imo).

 

Likewise with the right side of the blueline.....before signing long term pieces, it's important imo to consider things like

1) what will be the effect on Hughes' role here - if for example - you were to sign an Erik Karlsson?  EK may be a RHD - but as a puck mover and 1st unit PP guy - you're overlapping key roles in signing a player like that, for long term and huge cap.  I'd be more inclined to stay the course, and let's see what we have in Hughes - imo if this team is going to win in the future it will be principally in the hands of the drafted players this franchise is developing.   The necessary tweaks/situational additions necessary will emerge in due course, when theyre' in a competiive position - imo that is when you use your flexibility - as opposed to spend it up front as some advocates of big fish shopping this summer are on about.

 

So I think the plan is this:

 

1) stay the course.  keep drafting, developing and supporting those young players with the right 'foundation' players - the guys that can handle the hard minutes, shutdown minutes, etc while providing as much opportunity as possible for the emerging core.   That depth is important -whether people realize it or not - in the present - whether or not the team is 'contending'.  They provide the right conditions for young guys like EP and Hughes to be successful - critically important imo.

 

2) Avoid spending assets if possible, by looking to the reasonably priced mid range players in the free agent market, possibly as a priority over going to the trade market, which tends to be more complicated and less reliable source.

So for me the principal shorter term needs are a LW with some size, and some harder elements to their game (or at least ability to survive/thrive in the harder areas) - so I'd target players like Nelson, Lee.....and lately my mind has changed to a certain extent regarding a player like Maroon.  He's stilll not a great two-way player (still has not particularly impressive 'underlying numbers', etc)  - but imo he is notably improved without the puck (over previous years) - and as annoying as he was, he's kind of grown on me as a player.   What Maroon did on McDavid's line was a bit of a career-rescue for him - and watching him in the present, he's more mindful of a defensive player - who brings size, grit, and more consistency than in the past.  I think I'd move him into a list of principal targets as a good placeholder option as a winger for EP - one that probably wouldn't take a great deal of cap and term to sign (he's at 1.75 million this year on a one year deal - I'd be open to offering him a couple years at a bit of a raise, while dangling the carrot of playing with EP if he shows up motivated.

Secondly - the right side of the blueline - with a pretty solid Jet Woo on the way - I'd be avoiding the big fish - and looking principally at a guy like Stralman, who could help anchor that right side and be a reasonably termed placeholder who likely won't command a lot of term at 32 yrs of age - while being a very solid presence on any right side.

 

3)  Failing the UFA market, and depending on what is added in the draft, particularly at 10th overall - there is always the trade market - particularly with teams starting to hedge their rosters heading towards another expansion draft - which is another reason to be 'conservative' in approach and retain as much flexibility as possible moving forward.   Some folks in here proposing to take on Lucic type deals imo don't understand the lack of leverage Edmonton has in attempting to move a NMC at this stage. 

 

In any event, even if the trade market is not a priority - you always have to be looking to improve in any way or form possible - so if you can add a reasonably young RHD, you're always looking to do so.  For me, the preferable way to do that (best case) is to sign a guy like Stralman, and then if you're able to move a Tanev for a younger fixture (like a Cernak, Foote, Mayfield) - you have made a pretty good step forward in 'rebuiding/tooling' the right side.    Ristolainen is of course a nice option if that's a possibility, but hard to assess the 'reality' of an option like that.

 

If they sign a versatile center/winger like Nelson, then you take the pressure off a player like Gaudette if you were to move a player like Sutter. 

I think if they were to manage to sign a pair of forwards - ie a two way center and a player like Maroon - they could be in a position to trade a more 'foundational' piece like Sutter - but in the absence of doing so, he remains very important in enabling a player like EP, and maintaining a secondary scoring second line like Horvat's - whose line could also benefit a lot from maintaining the depth it currently has with Sutter/Beagle lines.  If they're looking to the trade market, a player like Boone Jenner would be at the absolute top of my wish list where forwards are concerned - and it may  be an opportune time to deal with the CBJ, depending on their plans with expiring contracts and the cap flexibility they may or may not have this summer.  Regardless, I think it's highly likely a few forwards are shed, maybe by trade, maybe simply waived/dumped in the process this summer.

 

1) stay the course

2) be active in the mid range UFA market

3) in spite of 1 and 2, remain vigilant in the trade market, because none of the above are necessarily mutually exclusive.

 

Number 2 isn’t our managements strong suit. We gave up more picks in a rebuild than contenders and our picks are much higher than contender picks.

[oldnews]

14 hours ago, Tomatoes11 said:

Number 2 isn’t our managements strong suit. We gave up more picks in a rebuild than contenders

Derp.

Number 2 is looking at the mid range UFA market - your cool story is irrelevent to number 2.

[Schmautzie]

I’ve been impressed with the play of Marcus Johansson in the playoffs with Boston. I think he would be a good fit to play with Elias and Brock. Plus he’s only 28 and shouldn’t cost too much as an UFA.

 

As for defence either Myers or Stralman.

[higgyfan]

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

So I think the plan is this:

 

1) stay the course.  keep drafting, developing and supporting those young players with the right 'foundation' players - the guys that can handle the hard minutes, shutdown minutes, etc while providing as much opportunity as possible for the emerging core.   That depth is important -whether people realize it or not - in the present - whether or not the team is 'contending'.  They provide the right conditions for young guys like EP and Hughes to be successful - critically important imo.

Agreed.  In 2 or 3 years there will be prospects ready to fill some of the holes on the team.

 

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

2) Avoid spending assets if possible, by looking to the reasonably priced mid range players in the free agent market, possibly as a priority over going to the trade market, which tends to be more complicated and less reliable source.

Go for mid range older vets who are more likely willing to sign shorter term deals.  Identified weaknesses are top 6 LW + RW and a top 4 RD. 

 

On Pete's line, I like Maroon if he will sign at 3yrs or less.  I wouldn't mind another go around with Vanek, who definitely takes a 2yr term.  If the Canucks pick Krebs at #10, I think he is on Pete's LW in a 2-3 years.

 

On Bo's line, I'd love to see Justin Williams (who will take ++$, but will probably sign for 2yrs).  He sure is durable for his age!

 

I agree we need 3rd line C and I like the idea of acquiring a guy like Nelson who can also play the W in support of Gaudette. At 27 yrs old, Nelson's #s have been very consistent and his flexibility would be valuable enough to allow for longer term.

 

RD is a tougher one.  Stralman would be ok as a placeholder, I too think Woo may be ready within 2yrs.  JB should wait for next years ufa class if he wants a young top 4 RD, otherwise he'll have to make a trade.
 

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

3)  Failing the UFA market, and depending on what is added in the draft, particularly at 10th overall - there is always the trade market - particularly with teams starting to hedge their rosters heading towards another expansion draft - which is another reason to be 'conservative' in approach and retain as much flexibility as possible moving forward.   Some folks in here proposing to take on Lucic type deals imo don't understand the lack of leverage Edmonton has in attempting to move a NMC at this stage. 

So true.  The only way I'm happy with trading the #10 is if the return is a player that the team would protect as a core type.

Absolute NO for Lucic.

 

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

In any event, even if the trade market is not a priority - you always have to be looking to improve in any way or form possible - so if you can add a reasonably young RHD, you're always looking to do so.  For me, the preferable way to do that (best case) is to sign a guy like Stralman, and then if you're able to move a Tanev for a younger fixture (like a Cernak, Foote, Mayfield) - you have made a pretty good step forward in 'rebuiding/tooling' the right side.    Ristolainen is of course a nice option if that's a possibility, but hard to assess the 'reality' of an option like that.

Nice.  Even if JB has to sweeten it with a retained part or + one of the players being displace by the UFA additions.

 

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

If they sign a versatile center/winger like Nelson, then you take the pressure off a player like Gaudette if you were to move a player like Sutter. 

 

Sutter can be traded for a 2020 pick or packaged for a decent prospect.

 

If they're looking to the trade market, a player like Boone Jenner would be at the absolute top of my wish list where forwards are concerned - and it may  be an opportune time to deal with the CBJ, depending on their plans with expiring contracts and the cap flexibility they may or may not have this summer.  Regardless, I think it's highly likely a few forwards are shed, maybe by trade, maybe simply waived/dumped in the process this summer.

 

I would love to have Boone on our team, although I think the asking price would be too high.  I could see any package including varying packages including some of Gaudette, Hughes, Virtanen, Dipietro, any of the tweener rfas and 2nd round pick.  I don't like the idea of losing assets, but Jenner is definitely a core type player.

 

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

 

1) stay the course

2) be active in the mid range UFA market

3) in spite of 1 and 2, remain vigilant in the trade market, because none of the above are necessarily mutually exclusive.

 

Great post oldnews.

[WeneedLumme]

6 hours ago, oldnews said:

Derp.

Number 2 is looking at the mid range UFA market - your cool story is irrelevent to number 2.

Actually, most of his posts are number 2, lol.

[canuck73_3]

31 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

Actually, most of his posts are number 2, lol.

Accurate.

[Nuck1991]

i like william karlsson, great 2 way player, if he maked it to free agency, we should be all over him. 

matt dumba could solve a lot of problems for canucks but i guess hes intouchable.

[IBatch]

On 5/20/2019 at 12:06 AM, Tomatoes11 said:

Number 2 isn’t our managements strong suit. We gave up more picks in a rebuild than contenders and our picks are much higher than contender picks.

More crazy talk I see.  Did you know that in the last 20 drafts that the average draft percent success for the 3rd round and on is 13.2 for finding players that play 100 or more NHL games?  That’s works out to ten players in 19 years, or  little over .5 per draft.   Buffalo ranks 15th and here’s their lists of late round gems..

 

Dennis Wideman

Andrej Sekera

Gaustad

Clarke MacArthur

Paul Byron

Brayden McNabb

Nathan Gerbe 

Marcus Foligno

Patrick Kaleta 

 

Of those 3 are 3rd rounders.  

 

Benning could literally give every single pick past the first two away and it would be a coin toss that we’d even get one player out of the rest.   And the NHL leader in this catagory is PIT, they actually have done great, struck gold in 23% of their picks past the second round, good thing too as they needed them given they’ve been a contender for at least half that time.  We have 7 guys and a 7.1% success rate past the second round in the last 20 years.  

 

Its a crapshoot.   Plus looking through the list of names 300 or so names here’s what I’d call actual impact players.

 

Yandle

Marchand

Gaudreau

Byfuglien

Pesce

Slavin

Barrie

Liles

Atkinson

Benn

Franzen

Trocheck

Dadonov

Quick

Visnovsky

Falk

Gallagher

Rinne

Ekholm

Hornqvist

Nielsen

Lee

Lundqvist

Callahan

Stone

Elliot

Hoffman

Dzingel

Sharp

Ghost

Letang

Muzzin

Murray

Guentzal

Moulson

Bortuzzo

Bishop

Parayko

Pavelski

Erhoff

Bonino

Point

Palat

Cirelli

Stralman

Edler

Bieksa

Hansen

Holtby

Oduya

Hellebuyck

Reimer

 

Fifty-two total.

 

This works out to about 15% of those guys that played 100 NHL games, most of these guys are top six or top four defenseman but and have been starting goalies at some point.   Some are stars or even superstars.   It also means that every team averages less then one of these guys every ten years.  

 

Of what’s most of them about half  are two contract or less players, the rest character guys that carved a decent career.   I included Hansen, what a gem.

 

Of course you can’t win if you don’t play, but this does show how bad the odds are to find a gem that can make an impact.  I have high hopes that Madden will be one of them, THN calls him a steal that should have been picked a lot higher already.    

[mll]

9 hours ago, Nuck1991 said:

i like william karlsson, great 2 way player, if he maked it to free agency, we should be all over him. 

matt dumba could solve a lot of problems for canucks but i guess hes intouchable.

William Karlsson is still a RFA - there's probably several teams interested in trading for him.  With Vegas so close to the cap it's likely for picks/prospects.  They are going to have to move some players - at the top of the list Cody Eakin and Colin Miller before Karlsson.

 

Dumba is indeed untouchable.  Owner Leopold in his video message to season ticket holders talked of how much they missed Dumba and how the only positive is that he will be fully healthy next season.  GM Fenton in his end of season presser repeated most of the same.  He is a core player for them.   They are at risk of losing Spurgeon to free agency in a year and don't have much coming up in the system on D.

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

On 5/19/2019 at 10:35 AM, oldnews said:

You can't really answer a question like this not knowing:

 

1) what UFAs will be interested in signing here

and

2) what trade opportunities will emerge in the offseason.

What I think you can do regardless, is generate a framework of a plan you intend to pursue.

 

Identify your shorter term needs - and then assess what the longer term projections at those positions are.

 

For example, the team might need a top 6 LW to play with EP - or could opt for a center/winger to complement him....

It could also use another RHD in the absence of Gudbranson - one that could either fill a shutdown role, or play a dual role in supporting Tanev (to not have to handle the bulk of hard minutes - perhaps making him a bit more durable if they're fortunate) while also providing some two way minutes - perhaps ideally a guy that could anchor Hughes while also handling some larger minutes (pk, shutdown) at the same time.

 

In whatever case you're also looking at who is in the system - and who they're likely to draft at 10 (something they will know before going to the UFA market July 1st).

Presently the wingers in the system may be the least deep of ppsitions (not really a concern imo as they also tend to be the most readily available assest)....but before going out and signing a winger to maximum term/cap, the implications not only on future pieces at that position - but also the larger cap structure moving forward - have to be taken into account.

This is why I'd lean strongly away from the big fish wingers in free agency, regardless of the shorter term uptick they might provide on Pettersson's wing.    Another complication is the type of player that best complements him - imo a reason to again steer clear of a Panarin type signing - is the the EP line (with Boeser) - could use some size, forecheck and hard areas presence (and down low defensive support for a young, undersized EP).   For these reasons I'd target a different 'type' of forward - and in addition, when looking at cap flexibility movign forward (and imo the most important phase in this respect will likely be a few years in the future, not the present) - when you look at those factors, I think it's 'better' to target the more mid range forwardsm, ideally ones that are more versatile, can play up and down the lineup in due course (for me those are guys like Brock Nelson, not Panarin).  Like Panarin, Skinner imo is too (even more) one-dimensional and not the type of forward this team should target, in spite of the (isolated) upside it could bring (at too heavy an overall price imo).

 

Likewise with the right side of the blueline.....before signing long term pieces, it's important imo to consider things like

1) what will be the effect on Hughes' role here - if for example - you were to sign an Erik Karlsson?  EK may be a RHD - but as a puck mover and 1st unit PP guy - you're overlapping key roles in signing a player like that, for long term and huge cap.  I'd be more inclined to stay the course, and let's see what we have in Hughes - imo if this team is going to win in the future it will be principally in the hands of the drafted players this franchise is developing.   The necessary tweaks/situational additions necessary will emerge in due course, when theyre' in a competiive position - imo that is when you use your flexibility - as opposed to spend it up front as some advocates of big fish shopping this summer are on about.

 

So I think the plan is this:

 

1) stay the course.  keep drafting, developing and supporting those young players with the right 'foundation' players - the guys that can handle the hard minutes, shutdown minutes, etc while providing as much opportunity as possible for the emerging core.   That depth is important -whether people realize it or not - in the present - whether or not the team is 'contending'.  They provide the right conditions for young guys like EP and Hughes to be successful - critically important imo.

 

2) Avoid spending assets if possible, by looking to the reasonably priced mid range players in the free agent market, possibly as a priority over going to the trade market, which tends to be more complicated and less reliable source.

So for me the principal shorter term needs are a LW with some size, and some harder elements to their game (or at least ability to survive/thrive in the harder areas) - so I'd target players like Nelson, Lee.....and lately my mind has changed to a certain extent regarding a player like Maroon.  He's stilll not a great two-way player (still has not particularly impressive 'underlying numbers', etc)  - but imo he is notably improved without the puck (over previous years) - and as annoying as he was, he's kind of grown on me as a player.   What Maroon did on McDavid's line was a bit of a career-rescue for him - and watching him in the present, he's more mindful of a defensive player - who brings size, grit, and more consistency than in the past.  I think I'd move him into a list of principal targets as a good placeholder option as a winger for EP - one that probably wouldn't take a great deal of cap and term to sign (he's at 1.75 million this year on a one year deal - I'd be open to offering him a couple years at a bit of a raise, while dangling the carrot of playing with EP if he shows up motivated.

Secondly - the right side of the blueline - with a pretty solid Jet Woo on the way - I'd be avoiding the big fish - and looking principally at a guy like Stralman, who could help anchor that right side and be a reasonably termed placeholder who likely won't command a lot of term at 32 yrs of age - while being a very solid presence on any right side.

 

3)  Failing the UFA market, and depending on what is added in the draft, particularly at 10th overall - there is always the trade market - particularly with teams starting to hedge their rosters heading towards another expansion draft - which is another reason to be 'conservative' in approach and retain as much flexibility as possible moving forward.   Some folks in here proposing to take on Lucic type deals imo don't understand the lack of leverage Edmonton has in attempting to move a NMC at this stage. 

 

In any event, even if the trade market is not a priority - you always have to be looking to improve in any way or form possible - so if you can add a reasonably young RHD, you're always looking to do so.  For me, the preferable way to do that (best case) is to sign a guy like Stralman, and then if you're able to move a Tanev for a younger fixture (like a Cernak, Foote, Mayfield) - you have made a pretty good step forward in 'rebuiding/tooling' the right side.    Ristolainen is of course a nice option if that's a possibility, but hard to assess the 'reality' of an option like that.

 

If they sign a versatile center/winger like Nelson, then you take the pressure off a player like Gaudette if you were to move a player like Sutter. 

I think if they were to manage to sign a pair of forwards - ie a two way center and a player like Maroon - they could be in a position to trade a more 'foundational' piece like Sutter - but in the absence of doing so, he remains very important in enabling a player like EP, and maintaining a secondary scoring second line like Horvat's - whose line could also benefit a lot from maintaining the depth it currently has with Sutter/Beagle lines.  If they're looking to the trade market, a player like Boone Jenner would be at the absolute top of my wish list where forwards are concerned - and it may  be an opportune time to deal with the CBJ, depending on their plans with expiring contracts and the cap flexibility they may or may not have this summer.  Regardless, I think it's highly likely a few forwards are shed, maybe by trade, maybe simply waived/dumped in the process this summer.

 

1) stay the course

2) be active in the mid range UFA market

3) in spite of 1 and 2, remain vigilant in the trade market, because none of the above are necessarily mutually exclusive.

 

Well, I certainly wouldn't say you're wrong or that it's not a good plan. When I switch hats and look at it from your perspective, I agree about staying the course and improving conservstively. 

 

The variable for me is the increasing drumbeat of expectation after ... (a) the past five years of erosion-losing ... and ... (b) the excitement of this past season in being closer to competing than we thought.

 

The drumbeat of expectation to make the playoffs is only going to get louder now that Pettersson, Hughes, Boeser, Gaudette, Demko, etc, are all here. So as much as "staying the course" makes sense - which we still need to do - a significant portion of the fanbase is going to expect this team to be making the playoffs next season. And whether that's realistic or not, the expectation will undoubtedly be present. 

 

So, for the past five seasons (at least), we have struggled to score goals. It's a major issue that needs to be addressed. It is the very one dimension that needs to be improved upon sooner rather than later taking into consideration the expectation I mentioned above. 

 

In my mind, Skinner takes us to the next level in our ongoing need for scoring plus puts us in a much better position to satisfy the increasing expectation of playoffs in the short term. He's a 30-40 goal scorer at 27. Imo, adding Skinner would provide the right conditions for our Top 6 to be successful, pulling them forward to the level where they need to go to be successful. At the same time  with the Top 6 more stable, it would allow for Gaudette and Virtanen to take the next step in the bottom six and emerge organically along with other development pieces.

 

Just my .02.

 

I'd say ...

 

1. Add Skinner 

2. Continue to stay the course

3. Draft a Scoring winger (for end of Skinner contract)

4. Draft a Dman

5. Look for affordable UFA

6. Be vigilant in trade market

 

 

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Well, I certainly wouldn't say you're wrong or that it's not a good plan. When I switch hats and look at it from your perspective, I agree about staying the course and improving conservstively. 

 

The variable for me is the increasing drumbeat of expectation after ... (a) the past five years of erosion-losing ... and ... (b) the excitement of this past season in being closer to competing than we thought.

 

The drumbeat of expectation to make the playoffs is only going to get louder now that Pettersson, Hughes, Boeser, Gaudette, Demko, etc, are all here. So as much as "staying the course" makes sense - which we still need to do - a significant portion of the fanbase is going to expect this team to be making the playoffs next season. And whether that's realistic or not, the expectation will undoubtedly be present. 

 

So, for the past five seasons (at least), we have struggled to score goals. It's a major issue that needs to be addressed. It is the very one dimension that needs to be improved upon sooner rather than later taking into consideration the expectation I mentioned above. 

 

In my mind, Skinner takes us to the next level in our ongoing need for scoring plus puts us in a much better position to satisfy the increasing expectation of playoffs in the short term. He's a 30-40 goal scorer at 27. Imo, adding Skinner would provide the right conditions for our Top 6 to be successful, pulling them forward to the level where they need to go to be successful. At the same time  with the Top 6 more stable, it would allow for Gaudette and Virtanen to take the next step in the bottom six and emerge organically along with other development pieces.

 

Just my .02.

 

I'd say ...

 

1. Add Skinner 

2. Continue to stay the course

3. Draft a Scoring winger (for end of Skinner contract)

4. Draft a Dman

5. Look for affordable UFA

6. Be vigilant in trade market

 

 

They're certainly good points - but I'm assuming you're looking to add Skinner to EP's line - which could certainly score goals with Skinner and  Boeser on his wings - but Skinner is a fairly one-dimensional player, not a particularly good possession player, not particularly heavy, physical - just not sure that's the type of guy I'd want to add at the kind of term and cap it would take.  Tough call  - perhaps I'm too conservative, too concerned with overall fit (not sure Skinner works on a Horvat line either - if it's drawn into any amount of shutdown duty) - but there are probably other ways of looking at it...

[Smashian Kassian]

They gotta be actively pursuing both avenues. Not much choice. Theres isnt much coming (soon) in the prospect pool, and there isnt a wealth of assets to trade.

 

We need to turn over every stone to try & make this team better. Be smart about it, but we cant accept being a bottom feeder forever. 

 

 

[Tomatoes11]

On 5/21/2019 at 6:16 AM, IBatch said:

More crazy talk I see.  Did you know that in the last 20 drafts that the average draft percent success for the 3rd round and on is 13.2 for finding players that play 100 or more NHL games?  That’s works out to ten players in 19 years, or  little over .5 per draft.   Buffalo ranks 15th and here’s their lists of late round gems..

 

Dennis Wideman

Andrej Sekera

Gaustad

Clarke MacArthur

Paul Byron

Brayden McNabb

Nathan Gerbe 

Marcus Foligno

Patrick Kaleta 

 

Of those 3 are 3rd rounders.  

 

Benning could literally give every single pick past the first two away and it would be a coin toss that we’d even get one player out of the rest.   And the NHL leader in this catagory is PIT, they actually have done great, struck gold in 23% of their picks past the second round, good thing too as they needed them given they’ve been a contender for at least half that time.  We have 7 guys and a 7.1% success rate past the second round in the last 20 years.  

 

Its a crapshoot.   Plus looking through the list of names 300 or so names here’s what I’d call actual impact players.

 

Yandle

Marchand

Gaudreau

Byfuglien

Pesce

Slavin

Barrie

Liles

Atkinson

Benn

Franzen

Trocheck

Dadonov

Quick

Visnovsky

Falk

Gallagher

Rinne

Ekholm

Hornqvist

Nielsen

Lee

Lundqvist

Callahan

Stone

Elliot

Hoffman

Dzingel

Sharp

Ghost

Letang

Muzzin

Murray

Guentzal

Moulson

Bortuzzo

Bishop

Parayko

Pavelski

Erhoff

Bonino

Point

Palat

Cirelli

Stralman

Edler

Bieksa

Hansen

Holtby

Oduya

Hellebuyck

Reimer

 

Fifty-two total.

 

This works out to about 15% of those guys that played 100 NHL games, most of these guys are top six or top four defenseman but and have been starting goalies at some point.   Some are stars or even superstars.   It also means that every team averages less then one of these guys every ten years.  

 

Of what’s most of them about half  are two contract or less players, the rest character guys that carved a decent career.   I included Hansen, what a gem.

 

Of course you can’t win if you don’t play, but this does show how bad the odds are to find a gem that can make an impact.  I have high hopes that Madden will be one of them, THN calls him a steal that should have been picked a lot higher already.    

We are a rebuilding team, we have to play the lotto.

 

Not sure why the Benning fans like that tard weneedlumme tries to downplay such an inexcusable move. Trading away almost as much and in some case more picks than contenders is bad any way you look at it. That’s sad actually. 

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Tomatoes11 said:

We are a rebuilding team, we have to play the lotto.

 

Not sure why the Benning fans like that tard weneedlumme tries to downplay such an inexcusable move. Trading away almost as much and in some case more picks than contenders is bad any way you look at it. That’s sad actually. 

You really like to catastrophize things.  Please enlighten us as to all these picks we threw away.  And while young doing the math don’t forget to include the picks we’ve added.  Two seconds.  One player.  Beat the odds check.  One third in for Beiksa.  No players worth anything willing to leave aside from a$&hole Kesler and his minuscule list of teams, KB, Burrows and Hansen.  

 

Please enlighten us in how we could have added picks in this situation (Benning has stated many times the market didn’t allow for it, in other words they simply weren’t available).

 

And while your at it why don’t you list the teams that you consider contenders and outline for us how many picks they got compared to us?  Can’t wait to see how we lined up against PIT, SJ, WNP, TB, WSH etc.  

 

Trying to win with the Sedins a year away from winning the presidents trophy two years in a row made some sense at the time, and it worked one year.   In hindsight it would have been nice to tear it down right away...but he did tear it down to the studs that wouldn’t leave right?  Only Tanev and Edler are left from 2011, and Tanev barely played.   Complain all you want that’s ok.  But use facts as part of your complaining please instead of broad generalizations.   

 

Its easy to sit back in your chair and say you would have done this and that.  But in the REAL world the MARKET is what it is.   What did we get for Lack again?  How’s his stats any different then Markstroms too.  

 

If you add up all the picks he’s traded away, and the assets he’s traded away and what he got for them or maybe could get for them and then average out how well he’s drafted over the same period we weren’t going to get a star player from it.  Don’t forget to add the second from CLB while your doing your math either.  Benning fired him.  And replaced him and accepted the transaction.  Good grief tomatoes, can you say anything positive about the current management?  Give credit where it’s due and critique where it’s due too. 

[Alflives]

On 5/21/2019 at 2:08 AM, The 5th Line said:

Myers' wife is from B.C.  That and the old Benning/Buffalo connection is kinda scary, I wouldn't want to give that guy very much money.  

 

 

 

 

Would 7 times 7 get Meyers?

[Dr. Crossbar]

22 hours ago, oldnews said:

They're certainly good points - but I'm assuming you're looking to add Skinner to EP's line - which could certainly score goals with Skinner and  Boeser on his wings - but Skinner is a fairly one-dimensional player, not a particularly good possession player, not particularly heavy, physical - just not sure that's the type of guy I'd want to add at the kind of term and cap it would take.  Tough call  - perhaps I'm too conservative, too concerned with overall fit (not sure Skinner works on a Horvat line either - if it's drawn into any amount of shutdown duty) - but there are probably other ways of looking at it...

Know where you're coming from. I go back and forth on it. I am looking at it more from a place of adding Skinner because of his one-dimension because that one-dimension is exactly what we need, and have deserately needed. 

 

Naturally my first instinct is top line with EP and Boeser but I think he'd do well with Horvat. Skinner has a road warrior type mentality that could be a really good fit with Bo too. 

 

We've been one of the lowest scoring teams for years. We really need to start adding firepower and production.  I mean, Pettersson finished the season with 28 goals, Horvat 27, Boeser 26 ... all close to 30.

 

I'm less concerned with overall fit in favor of the value of his one-deminsion in relation to our need.

 

Add Skinner and we could very well have three to four 30 goal scorers next season. The Sharks had four (almost five) 30 goal scorers. The Bruins had three (almost four). 

 

Skinner may not be physical, may not have great possession but we do know that he can consistently produce 30-40 goals. I think the positives outweigh the negatives and would certainly address both scoring and the increasing expectation factor. 

 

With Jake and Gaudette taking the next steps forward, adding a decent affordable Dman, Hughes in the lineup, maybe seeing Juolevi, re-signing Edler ... the addition of Skinner would finally allow us to start developing our young guys in more of a winning environment. 

 

Just seeing an opporinity within the "stay the course" that doesn't waste good years from Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and makes hope for the future a bit more immediate and tangible.

 

 

 

 

 

[stawns]

On 5/20/2019 at 11:16 AM, oldnews said:

Number 2 is looking at the mid range UFA market - your cool story is irrelevent to number 2.

 

41 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Know where you're coming from. I go back and forth on it. I am looking at it more from a place of adding Skinner because of his one-dimension because that one-dimension is exactly what we need, and have deserately needed. 

 

Naturally my first instinct is top line with EP and Boeser but I think he'd do well with Horvat. Skinner has a road warrior type mentality that could be a really good fit with Bo too. 

 

We've been one of the lowest scoring teams for years. We really need to start adding firepower and production.  I mean, Pettersson finished the season with 28 goals, Horvat 27, Boeser 26 ... all close to 30.

 

I'm less concerned with overall fit in favor of the value of his one-deminsion in relation to our need.

 

Add Skinner and we could very well have three to four 30 goal scorers next season. The Sharks had four (almost five) 30 goal scorers. The Bruins had three (almost four). 

 

Skinner may not be physical, may not have great possession but we do know that he can consistently produce 30-40 goals. I think the positives outweigh the negatives and would certainly address both scoring and the increasing expectation factor. 

 

With Jake and Gaudette taking the next steps forward, adding a decent affordable Dman, Hughes in the lineup, maybe seeing Juolevi, re-signing Edler ... the addition of Skinner would finally allow us to start developing our young guys in more of a winning environment. 

 

Just seeing an opporinity within the "stay the course" that doesn't waste good years from Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and makes hope for the future a bit more immediate and tangible.

 

 

 

 

 

for me, preventing goals is a far bigger issue than boosting scoring, which should see a natural progression as the young guns grow and develop and they need to stay healthy.  The dcorp is where there needs to be serious work done, and that has to be through UFA as the org doesn't have the assets to make a move for a top 4 dmen yet.

[Alflives]

24 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

for me, preventing goals is a far bigger issue than boosting scoring, which should see a natural progression as the young guns grow and develop and they need to stay healthy.  The dcorp is where there needs to be serious work done, and that has to be through UFA as the org doesn't have the assets to make a move for a top 4 dmen yet.

Tyler Meyers would be a great pick up for us.  

Meyers Edler

Hughes Tanev

Stecher Hutton

Bulldog

 

OJ working his way into the line up.  When he does this naturally, bye bye to Hutton and his ugly wink.  

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

and that has to be through UFA as the org doesn't have the assets to make a move for a top 4 dmen yet.

Top pair? No. Not expendable assets anyways.

 

Top 4? I don't see why not.

[PhillipBlunt]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Tyler Meyers would be a great pick up for us.  

Meyers Edler

Hughes Tanev

Stecher Hutton

Bulldog

 

OJ working his way into the line up.  When he does this naturally, bye bye to Hutton and his ugly wink.  

I'd rather have Michael Myers as a defenseman for the physical element.