Shoes that fit. (Proposal) SJ-VAN

[hammertime]

SJ is undergoing a full rebuild the best way to do that is draft high just so happens that the next 2 drafts are pretty loaded at the top. So what do they need pker's for?? By the time the deadline rolls around I expect Rathbone will be making his mark and turning some heads. 

 

To VAN 

Mario Ferraro + Matt Nieto + 3rd

 

To SJ

Rathbone +5th

 

 

We get a Left side D who can PK and log 20 defensively responsible minutes while putting up 20-25 points and a depth LW who can defend and plays with energy. And JB's favorite pick in the draft.

 

They get "The best player" 

 

[48MPHSlapShot]

I'd rather hold onto Rathbone and see what we have in him. If he's good enough make Hughes expendable, we could land a much bigger return for Quinn.

[hammertime]

18 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I'd rather hold onto Rathbone and see what we have in him. If he's good enough make Hughes expendable, we could land a much bigger return for Quinn.

Woah settle down there I'm high Bone too I have high hopes for him as a top 4 D. Ferraro just fits our needs better. 

[-AJ-]

I'd like to see what Rathbone can do in the NHL first. In case he can actually be a 40-point guy, I'd like to find that out before trading him.

[hammertime]

3 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I'd like to see what Rathbone can do in the NHL first. In case he can actually be a 40-point guy, I'd like to find that out before trading him.

I feel like we will have a good idea by the deadline. maybe my valuation is way off. 

[ABNuck]

1 D out, 1 D in...plus an extra forward...who do we waive through to make space for Matt?

 

And I do realize we're only talking 3rd for 5th here but, as you stated that SJ is rebuilding...rebuilding teams rarely trade picks down, most often they trade assets for the potential trade up in pick value. The potential of Rathbone is, of course,  the offset, but I don't think I would trade Rathbone for exactly that same reason, the potential upside. Our D pantry isn't as deep as we think...we need to start developing that next gen top 4 now because D-men seem to take a bit longer to become that stable, reliable NHL top 4 D-man, so time is not on our side, we can't kick that can even further down the road.

[NUCKER67]

I'd hate to lose Hughes AND Rathbone

 

 

[Smashian Kassian]

Maybe I'm way undervaluing Ferraro but this seems like a bad trade. I'm not wholly against trading Rathbone, but we need to maximize him as an asset. Still need to build him up a bit more.

 

Right now he's a prospect for the sake of valuation, but if he plays & establishes himself as atleast NHL player (which he will, if not more) then your selling a young potential top 4 OFD. 

 

Then you could really command a great return.

[Phil_314]

Agreed with the others, I'd rather not trade Jack at this point, he's looking promising.

EDIT: to his credit, Ferraro does look like a leftie Jared Spurgeon (smaller but capable, mobile and puck-moving defenseman) and he is their top LD, so there's reason to think maybe THEY don't do it either (we love Jack's upside, they need Ferraro defensively).  Major point aside, Nieto also doesn't meet a need (we have many wingers -- Di Giuseppe, Gadjovich, Motte, Highmore, MacEwen, Lockwood, and we're well stocked for forwards in general) so I'd rather see if we could get someone like their RD Meloche (project RD but big and physical at 6'3", 210 lb. and decent offensively in the AHL too). 

Edited September 29, 2021 by Phil_314

[-AJ-]

1 hour ago, hammertime said:

I feel like we will have a good idea by the deadline. maybe my valuation is way off. 

I feel like you may be right. If he's that good or has the serious potential to be that good, we'll likely know by the deadine.

[hammertime]

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

I feel like you may be right. If he's that good or has the serious potential to be that good, we'll likely know by the deadine.

At this point I peg him roughly late 1st in terms of value. I would suspect SJ places similar value on their 23 year old Ferraro who plays the bulk of their PK and contributes 5v5 playing 19ish mins a night. I feel Rathbone has a higher cieling given the opportunity that we cannot give him with our Left side top 4 being pretty solidified. So they toss us a 3rd and a depth PKing LW in exchange for a 5th and Rathbones upside. 

[Pears]

Why would we give up on a guy who’s showing a lot of promise, for a whole lot of meh?

[hammertime]

3 hours ago, ABNuck said:

1 D out, 1 D in...plus an extra forward...who do we waive through to make space for Matt?

 

And I do realize we're only talking 3rd for 5th here but, as you stated that SJ is rebuilding...rebuilding teams rarely trade picks down, most often they trade assets for the potential trade up in pick value. The potential of Rathbone is, of course,  the offset, but I don't think I would trade Rathbone for exactly that same reason, the potential upside. Our D pantry isn't as deep as we think...we need to start developing that next gen top 4 now because D-men seem to take a bit longer to become that stable, reliable NHL top 4 D-man, so time is not on our side, we can't kick that can even further down the road.

Thank you. Great response. I'm just noodling around an idea. Ultimately I do agree I feel we should start the season with Rathbone as our #5 guy and really give him every opportunity to show himself A: To drive up his value. And. B: To see what we really have there maybe and hopefully he forces JB to make other moves. Carrying OEL as a 3rd string D wouldn't be a good look for JB. Moving Hughes to the right side doesn't change the issue. The reality is that Edler led the league in PK mins . though I played devils advocate in another thread that Poolman Myers isn't a terrible PK pairing. The reality is they can't kill the full 2 mins. So if I'm being real w myself at the deadline if we managed to run and gun our way into a playoff race. Priority #1 is going to be someone to play "defense" on the left side which isn't Rathbones forte. Buuuuuuuut hey if it is?...... And if he can? Well plan the parade because we found ourselves a #3D and maybe more. Which would open a wonderful world of other options.   

 

To your final point. This is why I targeted a similar age player one with the specific skills we require and moved up in the draft. 

[HighOnHockey]

6 hours ago, hammertime said:

SJ is undergoing a full rebuild the best way to do that is draft high just so happens that the next 2 drafts are pretty loaded at the top. So what do they need pker's for?? By the time the deadline rolls around I expect Rathbone will be making his mark and turning some heads. 

 

To VAN 

Mario Ferraro + Matt Nieto + 3rd

 

To SJ

Rathbone +5th

 

 

We get a Left side D who can PK and log 20 defensively responsible minutes while putting up 20-25 points and a depth LW who can defend and plays with energy. And JB's favorite pick in the draft.

 

They get "The best player" 

 

I don't think "full rebuild" is the best way to describe it. Look no further than Vancouver for a model for how San Jose will have to get through this rebuild. There is absolutely nothing you can do with those Karlsson and Vlasic contracts for, well, I dunno. Quite a while. Kane and Burns could be issues too. They have no choice but to take this slow and steady. They'll be doing their best to keep this thing as competitive as possible while they tick away the years on those contracts.

 

They still have a really solid core in place with Couture, Hertl, Meiers, Labanc. Add in Balcers, Leonard, Hill, Gambrell, Ferraro. A full scale rebuild makes no sense for them right now.

[Conscience]

We don't need a left d or another forward 

[Patel Bure]

I’d be open to moving Rathbone but only if we got someone like Braden Schneider in return.