I agree Vats likely stays this year. The 3 RD could basically split the 60 minute game pretty evenly. Wouldn't be surprised if Sami still ended up with the most TOI despite being what would appear to be on the 3rd pairing. He's likely to see PK time ahead of Montour and PP time pretty evenly with Montour. Montour could be sheltered to ensure he is in a position to succeed. That being said, if Montour is thriving or we are struggling at a certain position offensively, I could still see Vats being traded near the deadline. I don't see any way he is on the roster next season unless Montour falls off the map. Either way, I expect Sami to be better once returning to the lineup than he was to start last year. I still think he was dealing with some sort of injury most of last season. Until the last couple series, he wasn't bringing the puck up ice or using his slap shot from the point. It was pretty obvious something was bothering him, so his value can definitely increase, although I still believe it is high at the moment.
Line Combos: 2017-18 Roster Thread II - Massive changes not coming
- Thread starter Ducks DVM
- Start date
- Status
I agree Vats likely stays this year. The 3 RD could basically split the 60 minute game pretty evenly. Wouldn't be surprised if Sami still ended up with the most TOI despite being what would appear to be on the 3rd pairing. He's likely to see PK time ahead of Montour and PP time pretty evenly with Montour. Montour could be sheltered to ensure he is in a position to succeed. That being said, if Montour is thriving or we are struggling at a certain position offensively, I could still see Vats being traded near the deadline. I don't see any way he is on the roster next season unless Montour falls off the map. Either way, I expect Sami to be better once returning to the lineup than he was to start last year. I still think he was dealing with some sort of injury most of last season. Until the last couple series, he wasn't bringing the puck up ice or using his slap shot from the point. It was pretty obvious something was bothering him, so his value can definitely increase, although I still believe it is high at the moment.
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,188
- 16,804
lol this is on BM not RC man. If we had a veteran 3C that could produce points RC would give the 3rd line more time. The problem is Getzlaf and Kesler are the only two centers who can score (when Rakell is at wing), so they have to be given a ton of ice time or else we lose with Vermette fanning on empty nets and flubbing passes.
I'm very much looking forward to Steel being ready to relieve some of that pressure.
The real issue is that BM doesn't seem to buy into this team needing more scoring depth past Getzlaf,Kesler, Rakell, and Silfverberg
In terms of value, I'm going to discard trades that were rentals (defined for me with less than 1.5 years left on a deal) and trades made during or in connection expansion (e.g., Methot). Also ignoring Weber/Suban.
Interesting thing about the list - not a lot of truly comparable situations (i.e,. young defensemen with good contracts who were traded). That is my point really.
Here are my thoughts:
Hamonic > Vats. Hamonic has a good contract - ton of value. So Vats is worth less than a first and two seconds - but probably not too much less.
Adam Larsson > than Vats. Vats doesn't get you Hall (in fact, many were surprised that Larsson got Hall, but that's another story).
Dougie Hamilton and Vats are pretty equal in my mind - I think Hamltion is and always has been overrated. Hamilton was traded w/o a contract as a RFA. Again, value was a first and two seconds.
Vatananen > Coburn. But this is an interesting comparison - Coburn was pretty well regarded when traded and had a decent contract with some term left. So an NHL player plus a first might be a decent comp.
Hjalmarsson trade is interesting because it is recent and Hjalmarsson is a good player with term on a reasonable contract. That being said, Chicago was capped out and had to trade him. It looks like they got two pretty good NHL ready prospects (a former first round RHD with a long term contract (Connor Murphy) and 2nd round center). Overall, Hjalmarsson is a good player but I think Vats is slightly more valuable given his offensive upside. But this is the type of deal I could see the ducks making unless they find a good match for a straight swap (e.g., a player like Kadri, who I don' think the Toronto would trade). Ducks won't be able to keep Vatanen/Fowler/Lindholm/Mountour together past Sami's current contract - so at some point it makes sense to trade for younger, cheaper players (particularly cost controlled ones)
^ im curious, what makes Hamonic better/ more valuable than Vatanen? Sure, Hamonic has the edge defensively, but Vatanen has an equivalent edge offensively imo. Both play roughly the same amount of minutes, Haminic against only slightly better competition. Vatanen is better on the powerplayer, and I'm not sure if he's also not a better penalty killer. Both move the puck well, but again I think I'd give that edge to Vatanen with his ability to make clever little plays in his own zone before making those long stretch passes he's so good at. Harmonic is more physical for sure.
To me they are pretty equal players. One is a better pure defender, while the other can do more for you on special teams and on the offensive side of the puck overall. To me, it just seems like the one who is "better" depends on the type of defensemen you need.
To me they are pretty equal players. One is a better pure defender, while the other can do more for you on special teams and on the offensive side of the puck overall. To me, it just seems like the one who is "better" depends on the type of defensemen you need.
I agree with almost everything you said. Harmonic is the bigger of the two, but Vatanen is the better player. With offense being a premium in trades, I find it hard to believe the return for Vatanen wouldn't be better than what Harmonic got.
I would expect around the same in a trade. A 1st + good prospect, a 1st + 2nd( Maybe 2 2nd's), or a high 1st.
BM seems to be in love with the 2018 draft, and depending on how things go, it might not be bad time to trade some established players and load up on draft picks for this next draft. In terms of timing, hopefully some of the 2018 picks can be close to ready around the time our window is closed. This will be controversial here I'm sure, but Silf is another guy I might think about moving after this year. He will have 1 more year left on his deal before UFA and will be 29 at the start of his next contract. How much for how long are we comfortable giving a 29 year old UFA Silf?
duxfan1101
Registered User
Hamonic is very overrated here. He's good, but I don't see much more than a 2nd pair RHD with not much offensive ability. He's a bargain on his current deal, but he will be paid more than he's worth when it's over.
I believe Hamonic is regarded as one of the better shutdown defenseman in the league. There is tremendous value in his contract - 3 more years with an AAV of 3.8M. When it comes to defenseman, I tend to value points less than others. But I can understand why some feel Vats is the more valuable player - but keep in mind Sami is a UFA in two years. His trade value will only go down going forward..
Don't understand the love for Hamilton. He's never reached his potential, has a bad contract ($5.7M cap hit through 20-21), and has been rumored on the trading block for many years.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,163
- 13,179
Hamilton this last season was very good. Put up 50 points and was above average defensively - after a slow start he had a particularly good second half of the season. The only issues with Hamilton are that he's a bit soft and that for whatever reason Gulutzan kept his TOI and around 20 mins for the season (although he averaged a lot more in the second half). The only time he was on the block was when he was about to hit RFA status and was rumored to not want to re-up with the Bruins. Anyway his return with awful, the Bruins screwed up massively in his case.
JabbaJabba
Registered User
Sign Jagr for cheap and put Eaves on left wing of Getzlaf's line: Eaves-Getzlaf-Jagr, or Rakell-Getzlaf-Jagr
Rakell-Getzlaf-Jagr
Eaves-Kesler-Silfverberg
Cogliano-Vermette-Kase
Richie-Rasmussen-Perry (lol)
No seriously, this team needs a playmaking center.
Rakell-Getzlaf-Jagr
Eaves-Kesler-Silfverberg
Cogliano-Vermette-Kase
Richie-Rasmussen-Perry (lol)
No seriously, this team needs a playmaking center.
If Jagr would sign for cheap I would do it. Not sure how much he has left though so it would have to be really cheap
AngelDuck
Rak 'em up
- Jun 16, 2012
- 23,188
- 16,804
The words "Jagr" and "Signing for cheap" don't go together in the same sentence. The guy has always clearly chased the money in the past and I don't expect that to change at 45 years old. I expect him to sign with the team that offers him the most money
Having said that I would love to have him for $4M or less if he does get desperate soon.
Having said that I would love to have him for $4M or less if he does get desperate soon.
Signing Jagr is a bit puzzling to me. The guy is 45, slow, declining, plays a position we're very deep in (RW: Eaves, Silf, Perry, Kase, ...) AND is notorious for going after big bucks.
On the other hand, he might still have some gas in the tank, he could at least give a boost to our godawful PP. Jagr also brings insane marketing value, the name alone puts butts in the seats. From an investment point-of-view, I wonder if the increase in ticket sales, TV ratings and other goodies would already pay back the few million dollars he makes on his SPC?
That being said, I think Jagr to Arizona makes a ton of sense. They just kicked a franchise icon to the curb, they could use a guy like Jagr in their new marketing schemes.
On the other hand, he might still have some gas in the tank, he could at least give a boost to our godawful PP. Jagr also brings insane marketing value, the name alone puts butts in the seats. From an investment point-of-view, I wonder if the increase in ticket sales, TV ratings and other goodies would already pay back the few million dollars he makes on his SPC?
That being said, I think Jagr to Arizona makes a ton of sense. They just kicked a franchise icon to the curb, they could use a guy like Jagr in their new marketing schemes.
Paul4587
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2006
- 31,163
- 13,179
Jagr will be great for the regular season. He always runs out of gas by the time the playoffs roll around though.
And there's a reason he's unsigned, it's not because he's old and past it, it's because he's holding out for good money still. As AngelDuck said Jagr has always chased the money.
And there's a reason he's unsigned, it's not because he's old and past it, it's because he's holding out for good money still. As AngelDuck said Jagr has always chased the money.
Pennaduck
Registered User
It's my point also. There aren't many (or any) real comparable deals because the "good young top four defenseman on a good contract with term for a good young top six forward on a good contract with term" type of deal doesn't happen. The closest you see this happening is top line for top pairing type talent, or top pairing for top pairing talent, and even that is rare and the value is open for criticism (such as Larsson for Hall, Subban for Weber).
I'm not saying a "hockey trade" of Vatanen for Palat or Vatanen for Kadri wouldn't happen. I've just tried to demonstrate that there is not a lot of precedent for this type of deal in today's market. Most teams try to address holes in their top four long term through the draft, and short term by acquiring lesser players with either an older age, worse contract AAV, or expiring contract. These factors make the cost lower for acquiring them, as not many teams have a Taylor Hall ready to dangle or have the luxury of such a surplus of good forwards that one can be used to bring in a defenseman of comparable talent without creating a hole elsewhere in their roster.
For whatever reason, when D with term are moved such as in the few examples you highlighted as comparable, it is usually for futures (Hamilton, Hamonic). The two deals I think you highlighted that would be favorable comparisons for a Vatanen trade value not strictly involving futures are the Coburn and Hjalmarsson deals. Both brought back a young defenseman who's upside are/were top four quality. Chicago also got a former 2nd round pick who looks to top out as a depth forward at the NHL level. Tampa got a conditional 1st and 3rd in 2015. So in both examples, you essentially have an older top four D traded for a younger top four D and a bit extra.
Based upon the market over the past few years, if Vatanen were traded it seems like it would be most likely for futures. A one for one type deal for a player like Drouin, Palat, Spooner, Kadri, Galchenyuk, etc. (those are some of the names I've read on these boards from people) does not seem likely based on past precedent.
I agree that the D corps of Fowler, Lindholm, Manson, Vatanen, and Montour may become too costly to keep together much longer than this upcoming season, so I am certainly in favor of any move to clear that up and bring in a good value in return. I just think we need to realize that Vatanen probably isn't getting dealt until the draft and it is likely going to be for futures. If we bring back a package comparable to what we got with Bobby Ryan that would be the ceiling for what we are probably going to get for him. More likely it will be a young forward prospect on ELC ready to become a full timer, and a 2028 first. That's not bad value, but its also not the missing piece that is going to help us win the cup this year or next.
KaseMeOutside
Based
- Oct 18, 2011
- 44,092
- 9,723
I really hope that they aren't planning to play Rakell at Center that means they are content with another year of Cogs on the Kesler line.
The only way i see us moving vats is for an older winger or center from a team looking to get a lot younger and I only see a deal like that happening at the deadline because the ducks aren't 100% sure what they have in montour, we have a lot of injuries, a team will want to see how vats returns, and a lot of teams think they are a potential playoff team at the beginning of the season.
Not sure who that could be though. It would be great if the sharks stunk and wanted to go rebuild and traded us pavelski with 2 years left on his contract for vats.
Not sure who that could be though. It would be great if the sharks stunk and wanted to go rebuild and traded us pavelski with 2 years left on his contract for vats.
Last edited:
91Fedorov
John (Gibson) 3:16
- Dec 30, 2013
- 1,229
- 727
I don't know if I'd be interested in a deal like that. If we trade Vats, I'd rather it be for pieces that could grow with our young core (prospect to 26-ish). High priced talent that is over the hill, is a problem our team will be facing very soon. I'd rather add pieces that will help that problem, not accelerate it.
Pavelski had 3 seasons of around 40 goals. But now he's 33, just dropped to 30 goals and costs 6M. I think that would be moving backward for us.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
That line is great as far as I'm concerned, if we're getting consistent scoring lines from two lines apart from them.
The Midnight Burrito
True Fan
We got consistent scoring from that line just last year. I have no idea why the idea that Cogs is some kind of detriment to one of the best two way lines in the league, or that he should be the one to go, is gaining steam. He's a critical part of the line, not some anchor holding it back.
dracom
Registered User
Because he didn't score in the playoffs and people think you need to be hitting 40+ points on the 2nd line or you're not worth the 3 million. In other words people are stupid
Ducks DVM
sowcufucakky
Exactly. That line works well when there's a strong forecheck and Kesler and Silfverberg can lurk in the passing lanes. Beleskey did it with brutality, Cogliano does it with speed.
The deal would be predicated on winning now at the expense of giving up a younger player, otherwise San Jose wouldn't do the deal either. At some point don't you want to make a real run at winning the cup even if it hurts us a little in the future. 3 to 4 years down the road we could be okay but it is really hard to win the cup without some elite core pieces and you are only getting those through top draft picks.
Rakell - Getz - eaves
Cogs - kes - silf
Ritchie - pavelski - perry
Not bad at all. Or maybe
Ritchi - getz - eaves
Cogs - kes - kase
Rakell - pavelski - silf
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Prospect Info: Grebyonkin is coming! (On Leafs' Reserve List)- Latest: LaPlante94
