Speculation: 2018 Off-season Thread

[The Feckless Puck]

We all know that the draft is a crap shoot, but trading away your 5OA and 7OA in consecutive years is not the right way to go for this team, in my opinion. Let's take ROR for example. He will help the team now but when we are starting to contend in three years or so, he will be well past his prime. Also, these proven players are going to cost more than the 5OA in my opinion. If Strome and Crouse make the team this year our prospect pool of the so called elite talent will not be deep as you suggested. If Strome and Crouse do not make the team, then we have to start looking at different playing to replace those two. I would keep the pick and try to pick up a couple of UFA's on short deals. At this point in time I want to keep all the talent we have, acquire more talent and let's develop our own ROR, Trocheks etc.

In one sense, I completely agree with you. It's when you say, "...when we are starting to contend in three years or so..." that I run into problems.

This franchise cannot afford to wait three more years to make the playoffs. At least, not if it's going to stay in this market.

The way things stand, this team needs to compete sooner rather than later. It's been six years since we've been in the playoffs. It's been five since we've even been close. We need to start having seasons with better gate revenue and a better marketing pitch to local companies, and the only way to get that in Arizona is to win. So what would be smart for a rebuilding team in any other market with solid ownership and no danger of relocation - i.e., a measured, long-term gradual buildup of fundamental talent - is not going to work for us here.

After what he's done in the past couple of years, I trust Chayka. If he decides to trade 5OA in order to get help now, I'll probably grit my teeth a little, but I'll roll with it. Why? Because I know that at pick 5, there are no guarantees. And there are no guarantees in our player/prospect pool either - we really don't know if there are still higher levels that some of these guys like Dvorak and Fischer and so forth can reach, or if they have plateaued. "Wait three more years" only works if everything eventually develops the way we want it to, and in this league the odds of that happening are catastrophically low.

The Rangers trade last year got savaged by more than a few people, but over the course of the season it got better and better in hindsight. I don't know anyone who would have traded Raanta for Smith by the end of the year, and Stepan rebounded from a slow start to be one of our top scoring centers. By the time we know if Lias Andersson is a star in the making, we'll be well past our "three-to-five year" rebuild grace period, and Tony DeAngelo isn't even in the big leagues anymore. So if Chayka can pull off another deal like that at this draft, then mas alla - over the next hill we go!

 

[Neighborhood Coyote]

In one sense, I completely agree with you. It's when you say, "...when we are starting to contend in three years or so..." that I run into problems.

This franchise cannot afford to wait three more years to make the playoffs. At least, not if it's going to stay in this market.

The way things stand, this team needs to compete sooner rather than later. It's been six years since we've been in the playoffs. It's been five since we've even been close. We need to start having seasons with better gate revenue and a better marketing pitch to local companies, and the only way to get that in Arizona is to win. So what would be smart for a rebuilding team in any other market with solid ownership and no danger of relocation - i.e., a measured, long-term gradual buildup of fundamental talent - is not going to work for us here.

After what he's done in the past couple of years, I trust Chayka. If he decides to trade 5OA in order to get help now, I'll probably grit my teeth a little, but I'll roll with it. Why? Because I know that at pick 5, there are no guarantees. And there are no guarantees in our player/prospect pool either - we really don't know if there are still higher levels that some of these guys like Dvorak and Fischer and so forth can reach, or if they have plateaued. "Wait three more years" only works if everything eventually develops the way we want it to, and in this league the odds of that happening are catastrophically low.

The Rangers trade last year got savaged by more than a few people, but over the course of the season it got better and better in hindsight. I don't know anyone who would have traded Raanta for Smith by the end of the year, and Stepan rebounded from a slow start to be one of our top scoring centers. By the time we know if Lias Andersson is a star in the making, we'll be well past our "three-to-five year" rebuild grace period, and Tony DeAngelo isn't even in the big leagues anymore. So if Chayka can pull off another deal like that at this draft, then mas alla - over the next hill we go!

This is kind of where it becomes cloudy to me. I agree that the Yotes need success in order to really start getting their feet under them. However, I don't think trading the couple of years of just making the playoffs and not being taken seriously in the playoffs as true contenders would be enough. I think the team would be much better off actually building a team that will be favored in the playoffs and expected to go deep. The Yotes were able to make the playoffs for 3 years in a row until 2012, but that hasn't done enough. Granted... that was with the NHL owning the team and all of the worst possible conditions for a team to pick up fans so it hurt the growth for sure. But there wasn't that excitement about them being really really good to get people to attend, ya know? Maybe that's just how I saw it, but this team just needs to get really good for a decent run of time.


That's also assuming the trades would actually get the Yotes into the playoffs, it didn't work last season after all. I doubt any team will have a start as brutal as ours was again for a while so going forward it should be better... but like you said, nothing in this league is guaranteed, even the play of older players.

I agree with you that I'll trust in what Chayka and co. are going to do. If they draft or trade... I feel that they've been doing well so far but soon enough the results are going to have to show a bit. Hopefully our patience will be rewarded and more importantly, the valley of the sun will reward them for doing it right. I also agree that the sooner the better for making the playoffs. This is the part of the rebuild where I get more nervous... when you start to see whether the prospects are actually going to help or not. Until now, it's mostly been about potential and hopes.

 

[Jamieh]

We all know that the draft is a crap shoot, but trading away your 5OA and 7OA in consecutive years is not the right way to go for this team, in my opinion. Let's take ROR for example. He will help the team now but when we are starting to contend in three years or so, he will be well past his prime. Also, these proven players are going to cost more than the 5OA in my opinion. If Strome and Crouse make the team this year our prospect pool of the so called elite talent will not be deep as you suggested. If Strome and Crouse do not make the team, then we have to start looking at different playing to replace those two. I would keep the pick and try to pick up a couple of UFA's on short deals. At this point in time I want to keep all the talent we have, acquire more talent and let's develop our own ROR, Trocheks etc.

You do know that ROR is 27 right? And there is no center available this year at 5 that many project to be better than him right? And that the Coyotes don't have another 1/2 center for this coming season and that position is very key to nhl success? I trade the 5th(Buffalo has no reason to do the deal) all day everyday for ROR and then It's on Strome to sink or swim.

 

[BUX7PHX]

We all know that the draft is a crap shoot, but trading away your 5OA and 7OA in consecutive years is not the right way to go for this team, in my opinion. Let's take ROR for example. He will help the team now but when we are starting to contend in three years or so, he will be well past his prime. Also, these proven players are going to cost more than the 5OA in my opinion. If Strome and Crouse make the team this year our prospect pool of the so called elite talent will not be deep as you suggested. If Strome and Crouse do not make the team, then we have to start looking at different playing to replace those two. I would keep the pick and try to pick up a couple of UFA's on short deals. At this point in time I want to keep all the talent we have, acquire more talent and let's develop our own ROR, Trocheks etc.

If that is our gameplan, then yes, keep the pick. I would also like to assume that if we don't have the #1 pick for a primetime F and we are trading for O'Reilly, the idea would not be to still take 3 years to contend. It means that we are likely prepared to contend now or within 2 years of that acquisition.

While the prospect pool will always have additions, subtractions, and graduates, we have a great opportunity here with what we have. I count 7 forwards with some NHL experience (Crouse and Strome included) who will be RFAs for the first time, starting with Domi this summer. Let's just assume that we work bridge deals and long term deals for those 7 - that is anywhere from 3-10 years for each of those players, and should be in the primes of their careers. So I don't think that adding a player like ROR or someone in the 24-28 year old range who fills a need and maybe removing 1 or 2 younger players (in the form of actual players or draft picks) is really going to hurt us that much. Especially if the younger players who were removed were either the weakest or lowest ceiling players on the roster. If we only had 3 or 4 forwards in that RFA range, then you have a case. Everything has multiple contingency plans that are thought through in developing the team. That includes what to do when we have an embarrassment of prospect/pick riches that can be used to upgrade the team - however that can be looked at.

I found a lot of great information in this view of the Vegas expansion draft. It kind of highlighted some of the players and teams that the Knights knew to go after, who to not go after, and how to effectively manage what they needed to:

Vegas' success wasn't rigged: Here's how the Knights were built

Think about that in the context of our team - there are players that we can look at from all sides. We can go after a high reward trade b/c of the #5 pick and the prospect pool we have. Our choice to take that risk or not. We can go after the glue player who may cost a pick or two between #20 and #50. We have the picks and prospects/players to manage that.

This isn't the Maloney days when we had high picks, but limited depth to the prospect pool and struggled to make reasonable trade ideas (except at the trade deadline, which was for a 2 month rental), followed by picking "meh" players that filled gaps through the draft. As Chayka said, he wants to be able to get the guys in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds to help round out the prospect group and give us an advantage in the long run.

If we have to trade away Crouse and the #5 for a RW, we get the RW at a higher rate of play now and we have players like Bunting or Steenbergen to back-fill Crouse's spot.

Sounds much different than say, if we had tried to trade the #6 pick in the 2009 draft, when we didn't have the depth of prospects. Hey, let's offer the 6th pick and Enver Lisin in exchange for a RW like Bobby Ryan, when we don't have anybody who could fill Lisin's spot as an NHLer or a prospect (remember that at that point in time, Lisin had played in more AHL games than NHL games, so he was still not a sure thing to be a top 6 or 9 F, just like Crouse could be considered). The difference is that we have players who can fill in for what Crouse brings, whereas in 2009, we had little depth to backfill trading Lisin.

When you don't have the resources of players/picks/prospects, your hands are a little tied. I don't think that we are that team any longer. I think we have the players, picks, and prospects to conjure up just about any deal on the market. The question is which can make the most sense. I agree that we don't necessarily want to give up the #5 OA after giving up the #7 the previous year, but when you stack up what we have in the pipeline, where we expect players to be, what other prospects can fill that gap, etc. - there are more options for what we could get in a trade with the #5 OA than if we had a middling to poor prospect pool. Keeping the #5 pick may make the most sense, but I think what throws people off is that for the first time, we can actually talk about making deals like this that involve some risk, b/c for the first time, we actually have the resources to do so and shouldn't not explore every avenue possible just b/c it was or wasn't something we were able to do in the past.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

You do know that ROR is 27 right? And there is no center available this year at 5 that many project to be better than him right? And that the Coyotes don't have another 1/2 center for this coming season and that position is very key to nhl success? I trade the 5th(Buffalo has no reason to do the deal) all day everyday for ROR and then It's on Strome to sink or swim.

It makes sense at first blush, but for how long do the Coyotes have control of ROR? At how much more than an entry level contract?

I see that centerman as that 1 piece to put us over the top. We can wait a year for a center. This year we shold take that pick and stack our defense or add a top line forward. Next year we should trade picks, etc for a young, top line forward.

 

[BUX7PHX]

In one sense, I completely agree with you. It's when you say, "...when we are starting to contend in three years or so..." that I run into problems.

This franchise cannot afford to wait three more years to make the playoffs. At least, not if it's going to stay in this market.

The way things stand, this team needs to compete sooner rather than later. It's been six years since we've been in the playoffs. It's been five since we've even been close. We need to start having seasons with better gate revenue and a better marketing pitch to local companies, and the only way to get that in Arizona is to win. So what would be smart for a rebuilding team in any other market with solid ownership and no danger of relocation - i.e., a measured, long-term gradual buildup of fundamental talent - is not going to work for us here.

After what he's done in the past couple of years, I trust Chayka. If he decides to trade 5OA in order to get help now, I'll probably grit my teeth a little, but I'll roll with it. Why? Because I know that at pick 5, there are no guarantees. And there are no guarantees in our player/prospect pool either - we really don't know if there are still higher levels that some of these guys like Dvorak and Fischer and so forth can reach, or if they have plateaued. "Wait three more years" only works if everything eventually develops the way we want it to, and in this league the odds of that happening are catastrophically low.

The Rangers trade last year got savaged by more than a few people, but over the course of the season it got better and better in hindsight. I don't know anyone who would have traded Raanta for Smith by the end of the year, and Stepan rebounded from a slow start to be one of our top scoring centers. By the time we know if Lias Andersson is a star in the making, we'll be well past our "three-to-five year" rebuild grace period, and Tony DeAngelo isn't even in the big leagues anymore. So if Chayka can pull off another deal like that at this draft, then mas alla - over the next hill we go!

110% agree with the bolded statement. The idea that we would trade for ROR and then be expected to contend in 3 years is laughable. That's what you do when you pick up an 18 yo Matthews or McDavid with the 1st pick in the draft. Not when you have another 5-6 high end prospects who are ready to break out and add ROR to that mix.

 

[Jamieh]

It makes sense at first blush, but for how long do the Coyotes have control of ROR? At how much more than an entry level contract?

I see that centerman as that 1 piece to put us over the top. We can wait a year for a center. This year we shold take that pick and stack our defense or add a top line forward. Next year we should trade picks, etc for a young, top line forward.

Coyotes would have control of ROR for 5 more seasons, that just might be enough time to draft and develop his replacement. Wingers are generally the least important position and easiest to get. There are exceptions.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Coyotes would have control of ROR for 5 more seasons, that just might be enough time to draft and develop his replacement. Wingers are generally the least important position and easiest to get. There are exceptions.

If we are offering Strome plus something else (2nd round pick? Crouse?) for ROR, 5 seasons of ROR is a fantastic deal. Upgrades us at C for the now and potentially future of ROR and Strome's careers. We don't get rid of the #5 pick, so we can still get a prospect to backfill for Crouse (likely a better prospect) since we basically upgraded from Strome to ROR for 5 years. If Strome never reaches his peak or flames out, we rid ourselves of that issue. If Strome is a strong player, we can only say that we probably improved with ROR the same way that we likely would have improved with Strome's progression. We may lose a few years from bridge deals or being able to extend him long term, but we are probably talking about 1-4 years difference there - the same amount of time it would take any prospect (like Strome is in right now) to reach the NHL.

Provided we don't open more holes in the roster with movement of players, this is the type of trade I say yes to every day of the week and twice on Sunday. If by executing the trade in a way that gives us a logjam at C and forces us to find ways to move players out in order to add players at other positions, then we start to get a little more complex and may not get the right value.

 

[Jakey53]

In one sense, I completely agree with you. It's when you say, "...when we are starting to contend in three years or so..." that I run into problems.

This franchise cannot afford to wait three more years to make the playoffs. At least, not if it's going to stay in this market.

The way things stand, this team needs to compete sooner rather than later. It's been six years since we've been in the playoffs. It's been five since we've even been close. We need to start having seasons with better gate revenue and a better marketing pitch to local companies, and the only way to get that in Arizona is to win. So what would be smart for a rebuilding team in any other market with solid ownership and no danger of relocation - i.e., a measured, long-term gradual buildup of fundamental talent - is not going to work for us here.

After what he's done in the past couple of years, I trust Chayka. If he decides to trade 5OA in order to get help now, I'll probably grit my teeth a little, but I'll roll with it. Why? Because I know that at pick 5, there are no guarantees. And there are no guarantees in our player/prospect pool either - we really don't know if there are still higher levels that some of these guys like Dvorak and Fischer and so forth can reach, or if they have plateaued. "Wait three more years" only works if everything eventually develops the way we want it to, and in this league the odds of that happening are catastrophically low.

The Rangers trade last year got savaged by more than a few people, but over the course of the season it got better and better in hindsight. I don't know anyone who would have traded Raanta for Smith by the end of the year, and Stepan rebounded from a slow start to be one of our top scoring centers. By the time we know if Lias Andersson is a star in the making, we'll be well past our "three-to-five year" rebuild grace period, and Tony DeAngelo isn't even in the big leagues anymore. So if Chayka can pull off another deal like that at this draft, then mas alla - over the next hill we go!

When I said contend I meant for the SC not the playoffs. We have to make the playoffs this year in my opinion, so starting to trade off a DVO, Fischer, Domi or a Strome might help next year but not in two or three years.

 

[Jakey53]

If we are offering Strome plus something else (2nd round pick? Crouse?) for ROR, 5 seasons of ROR is a fantastic deal. Upgrades us at C for the now and potentially future of ROR and Strome's careers. We don't get rid of the #5 pick, so we can still get a prospect to backfill for Crouse (likely a better prospect) since we basically upgraded from Strome to ROR for 5 years. If Strome never reaches his peak or flames out, we rid ourselves of that issue. If Strome is a strong player, we can only say that we probably improved with ROR the same way that we likely would have improved with Strome's progression. We may lose a few years from bridge deals or being able to extend him long term, but we are probably talking about 1-4 years difference there - the same amount of time it would take any prospect (like Strome is in right now) to reach the NHL.

Provided we don't open more holes in the roster with movement of players, this is the type of trade I say yes to every day of the week and twice on Sunday. If by executing the trade in a way that gives us a logjam at C and forces us to find ways to move players out in order to add players at other positions, then we start to get a little more complex and may not get the right value.

That deal you are proposing will not get you ROR, not even close. More like DVO, 5OA and a top six player.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

When I said contend I meant for the SC not the playoffs. We have to make the playoffs this year in my opinion, so starting to trade off a DVO, Fischer, Domi or a Strome might help next year but not in two or three years.

Well, I'll say this - I don't think we should be targeting Ryan O'Reilly. I may be in the distinct minority here, but if 5OA is in play it's got to bring us back a longer-term impact asset - even more so if one of our young prospect players is part of the package going the other way. And I'm a fan of volume trading rather than putting together a package of assets to bring back one guy, so I'd rather see some strong second-line talent in key deficiency areas on our team come back rather than one star-caliber player. If anything, Las Vegas and Edmonton have proven that solid depth and good talent will beat a shallow team with a superstar.

 

[Jakey53]

110% agree with the bolded statement. The idea that we would trade for ROR and then be expected to contend in 3 years is laughable. That's what you do when you pick up an 18 yo Matthews or McDavid with the 1st pick in the draft. Not when you have another 5-6 high end prospects who are ready to break out and add ROR to that mix.

I didn't say that, or maybe I should have been more clear.This team should / better make the playoffs next year, but won't contend for the SC for the next few years, just when ROR will be declining. It's nice to get instant gratification to a point, but I don't want to start another rebuild in three years. ROR is not the only piece we need to get us over the top.

 

[Jakey53]

Well, I'll say this - I don't think we should be targeting Ryan O'Reilly. I may be in the distinct minority here, but if 5OA is in play it's got to bring us back a longer-term impact asset - even more so if one of our young prospect players is part of the package going the other way.

I agree. I and a few others have said a better angle may be to try to sign a couple of stop gap vets and let the kids develop for one more year and see where we stand this time next year.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I didn't say that, or maybe I should have been more clear.This team should / better make the playoffs next year, but won't contend for the SC for the next few years, just when ROR will be declining. It's nice to get instant gratification to a point, but I don't want to start another rebuild in three years. ROR is not the only piece we need to get us over the top.

Understood - more of a context thing. I always view your status as a contender as fairly binary. If you are in the playoffs, then you are a contender. I still don't think the 2012 version of the Coyotes was the best version of our contender status, but they had the longest playoff run relative to other rosters. I view them as a less of a SC contender than say, the 09-10 team, but b/c both made the playoffs, they are contenders.

Don't make the playoffs, and you are not a contender.

I just think that while signing a few stop gap vets makes some sense, I feel like that is more of the take that Maloney would have gone for, and Chayka is a little less likely to do that. Maybe I am completely incorrect on that.

I don't think that any of the trades or signings made last season (Stepan, Raanta, Hjalmarsson, Demers, even Panik, Cousins, Kuemper, Archibald, Rinaldo, and any others that I left out) were bent on the idea that these were simply stop-gap acquisitions. Maybe Rinaldo as a "protector" within the lineup and possibly Cousins. Archibald was probably brought in more to show players how to play within the system and may not be as stop-gap as we think. Could just be because we needed a lot to fill out the roster with, but I don't see us being a team that relies on the idea of picking through the remnants of the 2nd/3rd tier of free agents as we may have been more inclined to do in years past.

 

[Jakey53]

Understood - more of a context thing. I always view your status as a contender as fairly binary. If you are in the playoffs, then you are a contender. I still don't think the 2012 version of the Coyotes was the best version of our contender status, but they had the longest playoff run relative to other rosters. I view them as a less of a SC contender than say, the 09-10 team, but b/c both made the playoffs, they are contenders.

Don't make the playoffs, and you are not a contender.

I just think that while signing a few stop gap vets makes some sense, I feel like that is more of the take that Maloney would have gone for, and Chayka is a little less likely to do that. Maybe I am completely incorrect on that.

I don't think that any of the trades or signings made last season (Stepan, Raanta, Hjalmarsson, Demers, even Panik, Cousins, Kuemper, Archibald, Rinaldo, and any others that I left out) were bent on the idea that these were simply stop-gap acquisitions. Maybe Rinaldo as a "protector" within the lineup and possibly Cousins. Archibald was probably brought in more to show players how to play within the system and may not be as stop-gap as we think. Could just be because we needed a lot to fill out the roster with, but I don't see us being a team that relies on the idea of picking through the remnants of the 2nd/3rd tier of free agents as we may have been more inclined to do in years past.

What's wrong with 2nd. tier? Today I would rather grab one of those than gut our team of our prospects.

 

[Jakey53]

You do know that ROR is 27 right? And there is no center available this year at 5 that many project to be better than him right? And that the Coyotes don't have another 1/2 center for this coming season and that position is very key to nhl success? I trade the 5th(Buffalo has no reason to do the deal) all day everyday for ROR and then It's on Strome to sink or swim.

Again, I don't think the 5OA will get you anything close to ROR. I really like ROR, but the price will be way too much for this team at this time. DVO could be our ROR next year, or damn close to it. Let our own kids develop and stop trying to gut our team for another 2C. This will be the last high end pick we will be having in quite some time, or it better beso I keep the pick and keep on building.

 

[BUX7PHX]

What's wrong with 2nd. tier? Today I would rather grab one of those than gut our team of our prospects.

Nothing wrong with second tier. Coyle is an example of that. What does it take to get Coyle on to our team? Who do you feel comfortable giving up for Coyle?

Not comfortable: Strome, Fischer, Panik, Dvorak, Stepan, Keller, Kruger, OEL, Hjalm, Demers, Goligoski, Chychrun, Raanta, Kuemper, #5 OA
Not comfortable without Minnesota adding something of varying significance: Domi, Perlini, 2019 1st round pick
Comfortable: all other draft picks in 2018, Crouse, other odd prospects

Any deal done involves giving up value and possibly redcuing a roster spot, prospect pool value, or other intangible. Sounds like we would get rid of prospects, regardless.

 

[Jakey53]

Nothing wrong with second tier. Coyle is an example of that. What does it take to get Coyle on to our team? Who do you feel comfortable giving up for Coyle?

Not comfortable: Strome, Fischer, Panik, Dvorak, Stepan, Keller, Kruger, OEL, Hjalm, Demers, Goligoski, Chychrun, Raanta, Kuemper, #5 OA
Not comfortable without Minnesota adding something of varying significance: Domi, Perlini, 2019 1st round pick
Comfortable: all other draft picks in 2018, Crouse, other odd prospects

Any deal done involves giving up value and possibly redcuing a roster spot, prospect pool value, or other intangible. Sounds like we would get rid of prospects, regardless.

I'm not good at making up trades, rt is the king in that area, but I would just as well try to pick up a second tier player in UFA. If not, I have no problem trading any prospect on the farm not named Strome and our 5OA this year. Anyone else is fair game.

 

[SniperHF]

On the line production thing. A few people did do some baseline summaries. Though they are from a few years ago so the numbers need to be adjusted up maybe 20% for the increase in scoring this year.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/nhl-2015-16-points-average-by-position.2103903/
This article has a little....spin...on the Habs so I'd ignore the actual analysis in the article, but the numbers seem accurate.
What is 1st line production in the NHL?

So just the first lines:

First line centers: All situations range: 55 points to 86 points
First line LW: All situations range: 42 points to 87 points
First line RW: All situations range: 42 points to 81 points

Taking the range from a few years ago and adding 20% for this season:
Center: 66 points To 103 points
LW: 50 points to 104 points
RW: 50 points to 97 points

Are approximately the current ranges. Though Center (McDavid) was higher than 103 for example. Giroux mostly played wing and he was right at 102 so pretty close. Kuchorev @ 100 points, so also right in the range. So I'll call this estimate good enough just from quick eyeballing.

So that Leaves us with:
Stepan @ 56 points, not terribly surprising he's below the range. Though without a garbage slow start he probably would have hit the lower end of the range.
Keller @ 65 points, so the mid-lower part of the winger range. But I suspect he's closer to middle of the range when you consider linemate effects.
RW @ Uh who was the right wing . If I just fudge it and put Domi in there, that's 42 points, also below the bottom .


So yeah this doesn't tell anyone anything they didn't already know, we only had one first line caliber player last year. But I think it's useful to put numbers to the gut instinct sometimes. So at least when you say we need a such and such line player, you know about what it is. Since league scoring is up these days it might be useful to readjust your mental shorthand a bit.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I'm not good at making up trades, rt is the king in that area, but I would just as well try to pick up a second tier player in UFA. If not, I have no problem trading any prospect on the farm not named Strome and our 5OA this year. Anyone else is fair game.

Same.

I always adhere to the idea that anyone is tradeable. ROR and Jamie McGinn were basically traded for two picks in the #10-20 range from a draft 2-3 years prior, an early 30s selection and a mid 2nd round pick from a draft 3 years prior.

I almost think that the equivalent would be Strome (taken 3rd OA 3 years prior, but value is lower), Crouse (taken 11th, but probably more of a 15-25 pick value) and a 2019 2nd round pick.

Strome, Crouse and 2019 2nd round pick

for

ROR and any one of Bailey/Baptiste/Fasching?

If you think that Strome can be the player he was over the last 10 games over the next four seasons and Crouse fills a role in the bottom 6 for the next four seasons, then stand pat. But if there is a thought that neither of these players are going to develop quite into what is expected and we can justify making a move, it has to at least be considered.

Personally, I would prefer centering a trade around the #5 OA for a player like Tarasenko at RW (or any RW with the proper value for #5 OA), if he were to be available. Leave as much of the C and LW prospect pool the same, but be willing to make a concession on some player value at those positions, if needed.

 

[rt]

Same.

I always adhere to the idea that anyone is tradeable. ROR and Jamie McGinn were basically traded for two picks in the #10-20 range from a draft 2-3 years prior, an early 30s selection and a mid 2nd round pick from a draft 3 years prior.

I almost think that the equivalent would be Strome (taken 3rd OA 3 years prior, but value is lower), Crouse (taken 11th, but probably more of a 15-25 pick value) and a 2019 2nd round pick.

Strome, Crouse and 2019 2nd round pick

for

ROR and any one of Bailey/Baptiste/Fasching?

If you think that Strome can be the player he was over the last 10 games over the next four seasons and Crouse fills a role in the bottom 6 for the next four seasons, then stand pat. But if there is a thought that neither of these players are going to develop quite into what is expected and we can justify making a move, it has to at least be considered.

Personally, I would prefer centering a trade around the #5 OA for a player like Tarasenko at RW (or any RW with the proper value for #5 OA), if he were to be available. Leave as much of the C and LW prospect pool the same, but be willing to make a concession on some player value at those positions, if needed.

Strome, Crouse, and a future 2nd does not get you ROR.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Strome, Crouse, and a future 2nd does not get you ROR.

Probably not, but it also may present more promising value than what the Avalanche returned in their original trade with Buffalo:

Compher is a 3rd liner.
Zadorov is a good 2nd pairing D man.
Grigorenko went back to Russia after basically being a 4th line C. Not certain if it was simply wanting to get back to Russia, or not fitting the system.
The #31 pick wound up getting traded back for a different 2nd round pick in 2015, plus a 2nd round pick in 2016 and a 6th in 2017. I don't know if any of those picks have put themselves on the map.

Colorado needed a huge facelift of its prospect pool. Not certain if Buffalo needs that, but if you are going to get rid of a C like O'Reilly, you probably have to get a C with good upside in return. Strome still represents that, although his value is less than that of his draft year. Buffalo had very little from their bottom 6 forwards. Crouse helps that. If it has to be the 2019 1st round pick, and we are a playoff team, we are losing a pick in the 15-20 range more than likely. Not the worst situation to lose a mid-1st round pick for one year, especially since I would have to think that picking up ROR would mean we were putting our playoff aspirations on the line starting this year.

 

[RemoAZ]

I still like Strome's potential more than taking a chance on getting back anything more than something that will be mediocre. Hopefully management isn't as ready to give up on him more than most here. He's still a former #3 pick with a ton of upside that has dominated at every level but the NHL where he looked pretty good for a short time last season. Play him with two solid wingers and he will produce. With our shitty lottery luck, when are we going to get a shot at a center with his scoring potential again? We had ONE since the team has been in AZ and we gave up on him before he developed. Let's not do that again.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

Thank you Sniper, that's what I've been saying. Our first line doesn't cut it. We need a top line RW and then a center.

 

[Jakey53]

Thank you Sniper, that's what I've been saying. Our first line doesn't cut it. We need a top line RW and then a center.

We all know how hard it is to get a 1C, and it would gut our team if we trade for one. Getting a top line RW would be much easy and less expensive to get. Who do you have in mind?