(Rumour) Senators "Will be open for business" surrounding 7th overall

[Alflives]

Just now, Provost said:

Ok Weisbrod… we were wondering where you went.

 

We aren’t following your dumb plan anymore.  Listen the grown ups running the place now.  They have made it crystal clear over and over again saying they want to get younger and don’t want to trade the chance for long term success by sacrificing the future even more. 

I don’t see Bruce as a coach for a team that is trading away their best player (Miller) and other extended core pieces for youth, and taking a step back.  

Maybe we delay the “step back” plan by one season?  

[Me_]

7 minutes ago, Provost said:

Ok Weisbrod… we were wondering where you went.

 

We aren’t following your dumb plan anymore.  Listen the grown ups running the place now.  They have made it crystal clear over and over again saying they want to get younger and don’t want to trade the chance for long term success by sacrificing the future even more. 

So… trade everyone over 22 years old?

 

Did I do it right?

[Provost]

11 minutes ago, Me_ said:

So… trade everyone over 22 years old?

 

Did I do it right?

Nope... good execution on a dumb post though if that was the intent! 

Kudos for that. 10 out of 10 from the Russian judges.

If you want to have an informed discussion without just posting random inane bloviating, go listen to exactly what JR and Allvin have said repeatedly.  They want to make some moves to gain years in age to get younger so they can add to the core of young guys right now and grow together into their primes for an extended window of being competitive.

Wailing and gnashing your teeth crying about a tear down rebuild literally has zero to do with any discussion the grown ups are having.  Trading away a couple of older guys and getting a couple younger guys just isn't that.

 

[gizmo2337]

These "open for business" comments come up every year and very rarely does anything happen. Seems those picks are thrown around like a football at the trade deadline, and then they hoard them at the draft like they are all sure fire bets.

[Me_]

3 hours ago, Provost said:

Nope... good execution on a dumb post though if that was the intent! 

Kudos for that. 10 out of 10 from the Russian judges.

If you want to have an informed discussion without just posting random inane bloviating, go listen to exactly what JR and Allvin have said repeatedly.  They want to make some moves to gain years in age to get younger so they can add to the core of young guys right now and grow together into their primes for an extended window of being competitive.

Wailing and gnashing your teeth crying about a tear down rebuild literally has zero to do with any discussion the grown ups are having.  Trading away a couple of older guys and getting a couple younger guys just isn't that.

 

Ok good just making sure we’re on the same page. 

[Gollumpus]

Conflicted. (rhetorical thought exercise for my benefit)

 

 I'm looking forward to the Canucks drafting a (largish) RD, and they are all hanging out down at 18 - 20th OA aren't they (eg. Lamoureux, Rinzel)? For that objective, being at 15th is okay by me.

 

This being said, getting a LD at 7OA wouldn't be the end of the world, particularly if he turned out to be a Chycrun clone (maybe Korchinski?) .

 

What else would have to be given up to get that pick? Might the 7th OA be had without trading the 15th? A potential downside of moving Boeser, Garland etc are the ripples from those potential moves; do other core players lose patience, not wanting to be part of (another) re-build, and ask to be traded, or just opt to not re-sign here? 

 

Moving the 15th for "something" that would be useful right now could also be interesting. What team(s) would be willing to to exchange a young, mobile, RD with size and is also defensively responsible and plays a physical game, who can also chip in a reasonable amount of points, is team controlled for the next several years on a team friendly contract, and is a good team mate, and is very coachable, for the 15th OA? And maybe Rathbone?

 

                                                          regards,  G.

Edited May 14, 2022 by Gollumpus

[Curmudgeon]

On 5/11/2022 at 12:00 PM, Outsiders said:

Boeser straight up for 7th if a contact extension is in place. Sign and trade

Refresh my memory: which NHL team has signed an RFA, then traded him? I can't remember when it happened, even though people talk about it every year.

[dontaylorforprez]

7 hours ago, Alflives said:

I don’t see Bruce as a coach for a team that is trading away their best player (Miller) and other extended core pieces for youth, and taking a step back.  

Maybe we delay the “step back” plan by one season?  

I agree. I feel like if management felt it was the right decision to bring back Bruce and Bruce felt the team was close; I would imagine he means with Miller apart of the team. If we get rid of Miller I think the team will cave just as hard as when Tanev left. So like you said, maybe hold off on the “step back” part.

Edited May 14, 2022 by dontaylorforprez

[stawns]

4 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Conflicted. (rhetorical thought exercise for my benefit)

 

 I'm looking forward to the Canucks drafting a (largish) RD, and they are all hanging out down at 18 - 20th OA aren't they (eg. Lamoureux, Rinzel)? For that objective, being at 15th is okay by me.

 

This being said, getting a LD at 7OA wouldn't be the end of the world, particularly if he turned out to be a Chycrun clone (maybe Korchinski?) .

 

What else would have to be given up to get that pick? Might the 7th OA be had without trading the 15th? A potential downside of moving Boeser, Garland etc are the ripples from those potential moves; do other core players lose patience, not wanting to be part of (another) re-build, and ask to be traded, or just opt to not re-sign here? 

 

Moving the 15th for "something" that would be useful right now could also be interesting. What team(s) would be willing to to exchange a young, mobile, RD with size and is also defensively responsible and plays a physical game, who can also chip in a reasonable amount of points, is team controlled for the next several years on a team friendly contract, and is a good team mate, and is very coachable, for the 15th OA? And maybe Rathbone?

 

                                                          regards,  G.

They should be trying to add a higher pick to the #15, not trying to just move up.  

[Gollumpus]

30 minutes ago, stawns said:

They should be trying to add a higher pick to the #15, not trying to just move up.  

Yeah, provided that they don't lose a lot of what makes up the core. Obviously, one year of Miller isn't going to get it done for the 7th OA, so what has to be added? 

 

A team which "might" be convinced to give up a second/lower 1st round pick for a price could be a more realistic target. Columbus has the 6 OA (Chicago) and their own (12 OA). Maybe that 12th can be had for an acceptable price. 

 

                                                  regards,  G.

[stawns]

6 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

Yeah, provided that they don't lose a lot of what makes up the core. Obviously, one year of Miller isn't going to get it done for the 7th OA, so what has to be added? 

 

A team which "might" be convinced to give up a second/lower 1st round pick for a price could be a more realistic target. Columbus has the 6 OA (Chicago) and their own (12 OA). Maybe that 12th can be had for an acceptable price. 

 

                                                  regards,  G.

no non playoff team really hasmuch incentive to trade for Miller anyway.  If he gets moved, it'll go to a bubble contender hoping ot become a ;egit contender or a team in their prime contending years who get knocked out of ths years playoffs and know they have to go all in on a sweetheart contract for one year

[Gollumpus]

32 minutes ago, stawns said:

no non playoff team really hasmuch incentive to trade for Miller anyway.  If he gets moved, it'll go to a bubble contender hoping ot become a ;egit contender or a team in their prime contending years who get knocked out of ths years playoffs and know they have to go all in on a sweetheart contract for one year

True enough. The only exception would be what may have otherwise been a playoff contender who fell upon hard times with injuries and the like, who are hoping to make a playoff splash for next year. This was why I speculated on the Blue Jackets.   

 

                                                   regards,  G.

[Gawdzukes]

On 5/11/2022 at 6:01 PM, 70seven said:

Pick 7?  Really?  Idk… this draft is pretty meh. Rather keep garland and Boeser tbh

I don't know about that. I'm loving getting to know the first 15-20 picks. It would be great to have another one imo. Garland is cool but he's so tiny and unique. Are his spinoramas going to work in the playoffs. Idk

[Me_]

11 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

I don't know about that. I'm loving getting to know the first 15-20 picks. It would be great to have another one imo. Garland is cool but he's so tiny and unique. Are his spinoramas going to work in the playoffs. Idk

If it’s the getting to know game that you like, e-dating is the place for you.

 

This. is Hockey.

 

Edited May 18, 2022 by Me_

[Warhippy]

On 5/14/2022 at 2:31 PM, Curmudgeon said:

Refresh my memory: which NHL team has signed an RFA, then traded him? I can't remember when it happened, even though people talk about it every year.

Philly did it in 2011 with Jeff Carter

[Warhippy]

On 5/14/2022 at 7:13 PM, stawns said:

no non playoff team really hasmuch incentive to trade for Miller anyway.  If he gets moved, it'll go to a bubble contender hoping ot become a ;egit contender or a team in their prime contending years who get knocked out of ths years playoffs and know they have to go all in on a sweetheart contract for one year

I'd argue still that New Jersey in fact is a team that could use Miller because he is exactly what they need to insulate the new crop of forwards.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

I don't know about that. I'm loving getting to know the first 15-20 picks. It would be great to have another one imo. Garland is cool but he's so tiny and unique. Are his spinoramas going to work in the playoffs. Idk

I think Garland's game easily transfers to playoffs.

[wai_lai416]

7 minutes ago, stawns said:

I think Garland's game easily transfers to playoffs.

Yes but the way he plays he's 1 hit from being on the IR in the playoff when the game is heavier. He's not illusive like gaudreau he likes the contact 

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

Yes but the way he plays he's 1 hit from being on the IR in the playoff when the game is heavier. He's not illusive like gaudreau he likes the contact 

I don't agree there, I don't think he gets hit anymore than anyone else.  IN fact, I think he evades hits more than most

[Gawdzukes]

50 minutes ago, stawns said:

I think Garland's game easily transfers to playoffs.

 

41 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

Yes but the way he plays he's 1 hit from being on the IR in the playoff when the game is heavier. He's not illusive like gaudreau he likes the contact 

I just wish he was more of a playmaker with all that elusiveness. I don't know maybe it's his line mates. He always seems to hang on to the puck for such long periods without accomplishing much. He's fun to watch though and I like him as a player so I digress. He's feisty and a gamer which is a good playoff mentality.