[Edited] Bottom 5 Finish Now in Reach!

[IBatch]

11 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I'm not sure its that easy tho.... lets say its in the range of 28-31 this year, without a prospect too I don't know that I'd want to give Motte up. He's such an excellent value player and allows us to spend in other places. Being that low in the 1st round is essentially a 2nd round pick, and I wouldn't trade Motte for a 2nd rounder in this current draft. Maybe last years much deeper draft, but this one's wonky. 

You don't trade a guy like Motte unless the return makes sense.   For sure a team would trade their first for him.   Last playoffs he was monster takeaway machine, arguably our only forward Vegas couldn't contain too, even on the PK and a man short.   McEwen can't do what he does ...  and if we lose Sutter or don't re-sign him, he will become the centre piece of our PK forwards left. 

[IBatch]

10 hours ago, Convincing John said:

Honestly though, we have absolutely nothing to offer. 

Nobody is safe from a trade.   Team has tons to offer.    Just nobody anyone would be happy to see go ....  Pearson for sure was a decent rental ... Sutter still is.  Motte - no thanks,  not even for a first. 

[JM_]

33 minutes ago, IBatch said:

You don't trade a guy like Motte unless the return makes sense.   For sure a team would trade their first for him.   Last playoffs he was monster takeaway machine, arguably our only forward Vegas couldn't contain too, even on the PK and a man short.   McEwen can't do what he does ...  and if we lose Sutter or don't re-sign him, he will become the centre piece of our PK forwards left. 

yup. If Tampa wants to send us Cal Foote, sure OK. But dunno, I'm not excited about a 28th-31st in this years draft. 

[Provost]

39 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Nobody is safe from a trade.   Team has tons to offer.    Just nobody anyone would be happy to see go ....  Pearson for sure was a decent rental ... Sutter still is.  Motte - no thanks,  not even for a first. 

For me, Motte will be one of our VERY FEW cap efficient contracts next season.  It doesn't make sense to move him unless that move comes along with some extra cap flexibility on another front by having a cap dump included.  I don't see how that would work though as he isn't a player that would be value that highly around the league.

As for the team having tons to offer, I think the presumed caveat is that it wouldn't be any of our better players/prospects.  That list is pretty short though.

Petterson, Hughes, Demko, Horvat, Boeser, Hoglander, Podkolzin

Really anyone else is moveable at the right price.  If someone was to offer us a 1st and a real blue chip prospect/young player for Miller... I would probably do it.  Like if Buffalo said they would trade Ristolainen and their unprotected 1st for Miller... how do you say no to that?  They have much less use for a 1st round pick (even a 1st overall possibly) than they do immediate help.  They resolve any Seattle expansion issues on D and give Eichel a top end linemate.  We get an excellent pick which means we could then even use our (presumably later) 1st round as currency to ditch some salary for next year.

[D-Money]

2 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

I'd be shocked but if someone offers you a 1st for Motte, you take it and run.

 

As for the rest, teams will be looking for warm bodies this year for their taxi squad. No reason we shouldn't be able to get mid-low round picks for a few guys.

Yeah, I was shocked when Tampa paid that for Goodrow. But like Motte, he was a quality bottom-6 player signed for cheap for an additional year. So as much as I like him - yeah, take it and run.

 

Pearson’s injury may actually open the door to new trade possibilities. He’s supposed to be out until the playoffs, so teams that would not normally have room for his cap hit may be able to juggle it on I/R.

[IBatch]

4 hours ago, Provost said:

For me, Motte will be one of our VERY FEW cap efficient contracts next season.  It doesn't make sense to move him unless that move comes along with some extra cap flexibility on another front by having a cap dump included.  I don't see how that would work though as he isn't a player that would be value that highly around the league.

As for the team having tons to offer, I think the presumed caveat is that it wouldn't be any of our better players/prospects.  That list is pretty short though.

Petterson, Hughes, Demko, Horvat, Boeser, Hoglander, Podkolzin

Really anyone else is moveable at the right price.  If someone was to offer us a 1st and a real blue chip prospect/young player for Miller... I would probably do it.  Like if Buffalo said they would trade Ristolainen and their unprotected 1st for Miller... how do you say no to that?  They have much less use for a 1st round pick (even a 1st overall possibly) than they do immediate help.  They resolve any Seattle expansion issues on D and give Eichel a top end linemate.  We get an excellent pick which means we could then even use our (presumably later) 1st round as currency to ditch some salary for next year.

True - but why would Buffalo do this?  Power - L Hughes (and a couple inbetween), all have tremendous upside - one article says think QHs but 6'2".   The way their season is going two years of Miller seems like a high cost.    Of course we take it and run and maybe put  Miller into the ROH just for helping us with a trade like that.     Get that Risto is low hanging fruit for the draft - but maybe there are teams who'd be willing to trade for him too.   RHDs aren't easy to find.   Not much interested in him personally but get that cap needs to also come back our way.    Maybe if we added Hoglander or Motte it would balance out. 

[Provost]

4 minutes ago, IBatch said:

True - but why would Buffalo do this?  Power - L Hughes (and a couple inbetween), all have tremendous upside - one article says think QHs but 6'2".   The way their season is going two years of Miller seems like a high cost.    Of course we take it and run and maybe put  Miller into the ROH just for helping us with a trade like that.     Get that Risto is low hanging fruit for the draft - but maybe there are teams who'd be willing to trade for him too.   RHDs aren't easy to find.   Not much interested in him personally but get that cap needs to also come back our way.    Maybe if we added Hoglander or Motte it would balance out. 

Yep... altogether possible we have to add.  If Buffalo ends up with 1st overall for sure... but if they are picking #5, maybe it is fair as it is.  I put a proposal in another thread that included Virtanen as an example.

 

Part of the valuation is Buffalo is about to implode so they need to entirely retool their roster or start a new rebuild.  We paid a mid 1st for Miller when he was a bottom 6 winger on Tampa... he doubled his output since so his value should be higher.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Provost

[IBatch]

1 minute ago, Provost said:

Yep... altogether possible we have to add.  If Buffalo ends up with 1st overall for sure... but if they are picking #5, maybe it is fair as it is.  I put a proposal in another thread that included Virtanen as an example.

 

Part of the valuation is Buffalo is about to implode so they need to entirely retool their roster or start a new rebuild.  We paid a mid 1st for Miller when he was a bottom 6 winger on Tampa... he doubled his output since so his value should be higher.

Five is around where L Hughes is supposed to go based on BPA... feel his name recognition could send him up right to number two.   Or even first.   The top of the draft has around 7ds and 2 C's....not a bad deal for us given it's exactly what we need (and if we slide we could get both).    Hard not to pull a trigger on a deal like that for sure. 

[Provost]

54 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Five is around where L Hughes is supposed to go based on BPA... feel his name recognition could send him up right to number two.   Or even first.   The top of the draft has around 7ds and 2 C's....not a bad deal for us given it's exactly what we need (and if we slide we could get both).    Hard not to pull a trigger on a deal like that for sure. 

Pronman's new rankings just moved Luke Hughes from #8 to #1.  I think you are right that in a year where they haven't seen many kids play, the
"idea" of a 6'2" version of Quinn Hughes is pretty compelling.

Obviously it would be an amazing move to find a way to get him wherever he is drafted.  Even if it meant giving up our later 1st as part of a deal (maybe not Miller plus our 1st unless we were getting 1st overall back).
It could pay dividends in keeping Quinn in the fold and at a reasonable price tag.  Assuming he would want to be playing with his little brother and helping him get adjusted.

Making that move before the BOG decides what to do with the draft could pay dividends because it is still entirely possible they delay the draft until next summer because most of the kids just haven't played in a year.  I doubt they will do that, but the governors want it, they all laid off their scouting staff a year ago and I don't know how many are back working.  An extra year of intelligence would make that pick more valuable.

Edited March 25, 2021 by Provost

[IBatch]

20 minutes ago, Provost said:

Pronman's new rankings just moved Luke Hughes from #8 to #1.  I think you are right that in a year where they haven't seen many kids play, the
"idea" of a 6'2" version of Quinn Hughes is pretty compelling.

Obviously it would be an amazing move to find a way to get him wherever he is drafted.  Even if it meant giving up our later 1st as part of a deal (maybe not Miller plus our 1st unless we were getting 1st overall back).
It could pay dividends in keeping Quinn in the fold and at a reasonable price tag.  Assuming he would want to be playing with his little brother and helping him get adjusted.

Making that move before the BOG decides what to do with the draft could pay dividends because it is still entirely possible they delay the draft until next summer because most of the kids just haven't played in a year.  I doubt they will do that, but the governors want it, they all laid off their scouting staff a year ago and I don't know how many are back working.  An extra year of intelligence would make that pick more valuable.

I'd probably still take Power, but if we got LH's that would more then make up for this season for sure.   Losing two in a row means the team now has to win four in a row to keep any sort of playoff hopes alive ... lose another one then six lol.   Doesn't seem very doable but with this team you just never know.      At the end of the day getting another D stud prospect or a C stud prospect, should help our future. 

[Nuck1991]

in a failure of season like this one, no one should be untouchable.

[mll]

6 hours ago, Provost said:

Pronman's new rankings just moved Luke Hughes from #8 to #1.  I think you are right that in a year where they haven't seen many kids play, the
"idea" of a 6'2" version of Quinn Hughes is pretty compelling.

Obviously it would be an amazing move to find a way to get him wherever he is drafted.  Even if it meant giving up our later 1st as part of a deal (maybe not Miller plus our 1st unless we were getting 1st overall back).
It could pay dividends in keeping Quinn in the fold and at a reasonable price tag.  Assuming he would want to be playing with his little brother and helping him get adjusted.

Making that move before the BOG decides what to do with the draft could pay dividends because it is still entirely possible they delay the draft until next summer because most of the kids just haven't played in a year.  I doubt they will do that, but the governors want it, they all laid off their scouting staff a year ago and I don't know how many are back working.  An extra year of intelligence would make that pick more valuable.

It’s been confirmed that the draft is not going to be delayed and will take place in July 2021 (typo by Friedman).  They would need to negotiate the conditions with the NHLPA and there are simply too many hurdles to push it back.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by mll

[grandmaster]

9 hours ago, Nuck1991 said:

in a failure of season like this one, no one should be untouchable.

There are times I think like this too

[IBatch]

19 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yup. If Tampa wants to send us Cal Foote, sure OK. But dunno, I'm not excited about a 28th-31st in this years draft. 

Most don't make it ... there is a great study done by a university on the draft from 1990-2010 (want to make sure the sample size isn't screwy by going to say 2015).... one of the curiousities that came from the latter part was that after 22-23rd overall, picks all the way to the end of the second round had the same odds of making it in the NHL.    And that the 3rd round combined to the end of the 7plus had similar odds of making it to 100 games as the second round.    Suggests a couple of things to me at least.    Anyone in the 3rd and beyond are great picks if they make it.    Late first rounders according to this historical part of the draft at least, might as well be a second.    In a way the price for TT was worth a first for sure, and LA got better value then a late first for sure.    It's interesting stuff.   

 

GMs go into the draft expecting one NHL roster player, and hope for two - that's it.   The majority of players in the NHL are first and second rounders.  This study would suggest that there are as many second rounders in the NHL as 3-7 combined.   25% of second rounders ever see 200 games.   63% of first rounders do... another telling stat.  12% of third rounders.   What's that mean?  One in every 4 years you should expect something, whether it's a Goldobin/Vey or Demko is another thing entirely, from the second round on average.   One in eight an Edler or worse.   One in 8-9 from your 3rd rounder.   And 2/3 from your first rounders (two every three years) and again this is only the 200 game threshold.     Add all that up together :   63% first rounder, 25% second and 12% third what do you get? Exactly 100% chance of getting one player that gets to 200 per draft .... rounds 4-7 combined give a team a slim chance of 2 per draft ... hence the hope for two thing.   And of course this also depends on the picks you have. 

 

Quality of players is another thing entirely.   Orr and Mario of course are better then anyone else who played that many games.    Why Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Bure were such incredible picks too.  The quality without quoting any stats, of course leans heavily towards to first pick of the draft and beyond, and past the second round .... well it for sure would be interesting to do a study on the HHOF and see how many made it past the second round wouldn't it. 

Edited March 26, 2021 by IBatch

[JM_]

5 hours ago, IBatch said:

Most don't make it ... there is a great study done by a university on the draft from 1990-2010 (want to make sure the sample size isn't screwy by going to say 2015).... one of the curiousities that came from the latter part was that after 22-23rd overall, picks all the way to the end of the second round had the same odds of making it in the NHL.    And that the 3rd round combined to the end of the 7plus had similar odds of making it to 100 games as the second round.    Suggests a couple of things to me at least.    Anyone in the 3rd and beyond are great picks if they make it.    Late first rounders according to this historical part of the draft at least, might as well be a second.    In a way the price for TT was worth a first for sure, and LA got better value then a late first for sure.    It's interesting stuff.   

 

GMs go into the draft expecting one NHL roster player, and hope for two - that's it.   The majority of players in the NHL are first and second rounders.  This study would suggest that there are as many second rounders in the NHL as 3-7 combined.   25% of second rounders ever see 200 games.   63% of first rounders do... another telling stat.  12% of third rounders.   What's that mean?  One in every 4 years you should expect something, whether it's a Goldobin/Vey or Demko is another thing entirely, from the second round on average.   One in eight an Edler or worse.   One in 8-9 from your 3rd rounder.   And 2/3 from your first rounders (two every three years) and again this is only the 200 game threshold.     Add all that up together :   63% first rounder, 25% second and 12% third what do you get? Exactly 100% chance of getting one player that gets to 200 per draft .... rounds 4-7 combined give a team a slim chance of 2 per draft ... hence the hope for two thing.   And of course this also depends on the picks you have. 

 

Quality of players is another thing entirely.   Orr and Mario of course are better then anyone else who played that many games.    Why Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Bure were such incredible picks too.  The quality without quoting any stats, of course leans heavily towards to first pick of the draft and beyond, and past the second round .... well it for sure would be interesting to do a study on the HHOF and see how many made it past the second round wouldn't it. 

^this it exactly. But we'll go in circles with the tankists that are adamant about stockpiling and how thats the key to everything. 

[IBatch]

34 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

^this it exactly. But we'll go in circles with the tankists that are adamant about stockpiling and how thats the key to everything. 

No doubt.   So far either JB crew is good or they've been lucky or a little of both, who knows really, but the arithmetic suggests they are batting quite a ways above average even without the quality of guys they've managed, and that included JV and quite likely OJ too.   63% of first rounders play 200 games ... first rounders work out the majority of the time, but not by much right?  25% of second rounders make that mark ... 12% of third rounders...the rest a total crap shoot really.   OJ's draft so far for sure looks a lot different then the rest, but at the time he drafted three guys in the top 31....bad luck maybe, or maybe great luck if two of them still work out which is entirely possible (Lind and Gadjovich have some game).    Anyhow, overall there is plenty of reason to still be optimistic.   Funny thing is now the teams been mostly drafted, if not entirely already, the real focus now becomes about cap hits.  

 

Edit:  On the odds, the only reason EDM hasn't taken the league by storm is because outside their first rounders, and even there they had a huge miss in Yakupov (who at the time the CDC was willing to spend the farm on, just like every other first overall since), they've managed very little outside the first round.   If they did they'd be a heck of a lot better. 

Edited March 26, 2021 by IBatch

[JM_]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

No doubt.   So far either JB crew is good or they've been lucky or a little of both, who knows really, but the arithmetic suggests they are batting quite a ways above average even without the quality of guys they've managed, and that included JV and quite likely OJ too.   63% of first rounders play 200 games ... first rounders work out the majority of the time, but not by much right?  25% of second rounders make that mark ... 12% of third rounders...the rest a total crap shoot really.   OJ's draft so far for sure looks a lot different then the rest, but at the time he drafted three guys in the top 31....bad luck maybe, or maybe great luck if two of them still work out which is entirely possible (Lind and Gadjovich have some game).    Anyhow, overall there is plenty of reason to still be optimistic.   Funny thing is now the teams been mostly drafted, if not entirely already, the real focus now becomes about cap hits.   

Judd did it all, have you forgotten? 

 

Hopefully they can find a way to dump Loui for next season, thats the biggest issue remaining from the original retool idea. 

[IBatch]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Judd did it all, have you forgotten? 

 

Hopefully they can find a way to dump Loui for next season, thats the biggest issue remaining from the original retool idea. 

I'm not too concerned about one more year of LE but if it's the right deal to get the right player (Hamilton?) then maybe. Just hope JB keeps it up and finds stuff like Schmidt and JT Miller.    And Myers really.   An exceptional D costs money.   

 

Edit: Not saying Myers is exceptional -   but go back and look how much we paid for our D percentage wise back in 2011... got to pay to play and we are not doing that on that front yet, sure QHs will change that soon enough 

Edited March 26, 2021 by IBatch

[JM_]

8 minutes ago, IBatch said:

I'm not too concerned about one more year of LE but if it's the right deal to get the right player (Hamilton?) then maybe. Just hope JB keeps it up and finds stuff like Schmidt and JT Miller.    And Myers really.   An exceptional D costs money.   

 

Edit: Not saying Myers is exceptional -   but go back and look how much we paid for our D percentage wise back in 2011... got to pay to play and we are not doing that on that front yet, sure QHs will change that soon enough 

Myers is a good player, and yes you pay more for UFAs. Plugging holes via UFAs is something all teams do, and rarely at a bargain. Only covid has caused that to happen. 

[IBatch]

29 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Myers is a good player, and yes you pay more for UFAs. Plugging holes via UFAs is something all teams do, and rarely at a bargain. Only covid has caused that to happen. 

Yep.   And my point is teams pay as much as 32-36 million on their defense today, at just over 80 million cap ... back then in the low to mid 60's we had Ballard at 4.5ish ... as a 7th D.  Vancouver right now is pretty evenly spread, plus a big chunk of wasted cap space on LE, Bear, Spooner and Luongo.   Damn and too bad.   Hope Hamilton is noticing our team right now, really CAR and VAN are good comps except for how long they've been rebuilding.   Both teams have a crap ton of potential.