Proposal: Keller Be Killed: CBJ + ARI + OTT

[Setec Astronomy]

I’m imagining Simon Gruber posting these threads.

 

[GOilers88]

Original proposal aside, you think Chychrun should be traded because he only has 4 years left on his contract?

I says pardon?

 

[XX]

Keller's contract isn't much worse than Skinner's at this point...

Keller makes 7.15m AAV @23 for ~50 points minimum on one of the worst offenses in the league

Skinner makes 9m AAV @ 29 for about 20 points... for five more years

What the f*** are you talking about

 

[Dead Coyote]

Did you read the reasoning in the OP?

First off, Keller and Schmaltz are 50 point players at this point... that's not worth holding onto through a lengthy rebuild that could take half a decade or more

Secondly, Schmaltz is set to make 24.45 million in real dollars over the last 3 seasons of his contract... that's no bueno for a cash-strapped team like Arizona

Thirdly, Chychrun only has 4 years left on his deal before he's a UFA, so he should be traded as well. If Arizona was shrewd, they'd wait until next season when they can retain 50% of his salary in order to maximize the return... that salary retention can help them reach the cap floor in the coming years


Given their cap hits and real money owed compared to their production, I think it's an easy call for the Yotes to part ways with Keller and Schmaltz while there still may be teams interested... if they wait another year or two and neither show signs of improvement then Arizona is likely stuck with them for the duration of their contracts, which I'll point out again are set to pay them more than their cap hit during the final seasons

For the reasons I just mentioned, I think it's Columbus who should be weary

Wow, you have no idea what you're talking about and you really doubled down on that. Damn, Chychrun only has 4 years left before he's a UFA. McDavid only has 4 years left before he's a UFA. Better trade these scrubs so we can rebuild properly.

Schmaltz is set to make 25m over 3 years, oh no. Keller is only a 50 point player...yep, definitely these things are true and unbiased and should be taken as fact and there is definitely no reason to not do these things.

Are you even a fan of any of these teams? Are you just doing this to stir up shit? Do you actually think you're completely right and are smarter than every NHL GM?

And you think a 2nd, a potentially decent goalie, and an older forward are the things we should be bringing in? We're rebuilding and should trade all our assets now but we want to trade them for older players without as much upside? You for real? Murray could flop just as easily as succeed, a 2nd would be lucky to even turn into a 50 pt player let alone a better player than Keller/Schmaltz and Nyquist is essentially useless for us.

I wouldn't trade Keller or Schmaltz alone for this. Even if we flipped Nyquist and Murray we wouldn't be getting back more than 3rds and they're worth more than that, let alone to us and our team and counting their upside.

 

[Perennial]

I’m confident in my opinion, and I believe you’re off the mark in a variety of ways. And it’s just a result of you not really following the Coyotes like I do. So no fault of your own. What’s more, is that makes you a lucky guy. Haha. Because it’s painful to follow the Coyotes as closely as I do.

It has nothing to do with my lack of familiarity with the Coyotes, it's based on my philosophy for how a team should be rebuilt...

Keller was 125th last season in PPG among players with at least 10 games played... Schmaltz was 132nd

Keller and Schmaltz are overpaid role players at this point, not foundational pieces... IMO, they don't move the needle enough to warrant being held onto over a lengthy rebuild

If you see them differently, so be it... I'm just sharing what my approach would be

 

[Perennial]

Original proposal aside, you think Chychrun should be traded because he only has 4 years left on his contract?

I says pardon?

Do you think it's good asset management to waste the prime years of your most valuable asset while your team goes through a lengthy rebuild?

 

[GOilers88]

Do you think it's good asset management to waste the prime years of your most valuable asset while your team goes through a lengthy rebuild?

I think the fascination this forum has with trading anyone and anything of value cause rebuild is insane, absolutely. Arizona is loaded with draft picks. Don't see any reason to trade their best, young, cost controlled number one defenseman for more draft picks.

They still have to actually play games for the next four years, and despite what people seem to think, icing a team of complete shit for multiple years because you've traded everyone of value is a surefire way to make a mess of all those draft picks you accumulate and ensure that you perpetually stay in rebuild mode. Young rookies and prospects need to play with other decent players in order to grow. They don't all just become impact players because they were drafted high.

 

[rt]

It has nothing to do with my lack of familiarity with the Coyotes, it's based on my philosophy for how a team should be rebuilt...

Keller was 125th last season in PPG among players with at least 10 games played... Schmaltz was 132nd

Keller and Schmaltz are overpaid role players at this point, not foundational pieces... IMO, they don't move the needle enough to warrant being held onto over a lengthy rebuild

If you see them differently, so be it... I'm just sharing what my approach would be

What you’re saying is that you’re willfully choosing the side ignorance then. I hope you’ll change your mind. Best of luck.

 

[rt]

Do you think it's good asset management to waste the prime years of your most valuable asset while your team goes through a lengthy rebuild?

The concept of “only four years” relative to the NHL is definitely unique. Go check out the Wikipedia page for the 15-16 season. Standings, scoring leaders, that kind of stuff. A lot has changed.

 

[Perennial]

I think the fascination this forum has with trading anyone and anything of value cause rebuild is insane, absolutely. Arizona is loaded with draft picks. Don't see any reason to trade their best, young, cost controlled number one defenseman for more draft picks.

They still have to actually play games for the next four years, and despite what people seem to think, icing a team of complete shit for multiple years because you've traded everyone of value is a surefire way to make a mess of all those draft picks you accumulate and ensure that you perpetually stay in rebuild mode. Young rookies and prospects need to play with other decent players in order to grow. They don't all just become impact players because they were drafted high.

Not nearly as fascinated as I am with the dogmatic opinions being thrown around by you and others as if they're facts...

If you don't see any reason to trade Chychrun, then you're not looking very hard...

There are several reasons to trade him, whether you feel those reasons justify doing it or not is another story

Those "other decent players" can be vets on 1 year deals... they don't have to be role players making 7+ million over the next 5 - 7 years

 

[Perennial]

What you’re saying is that you’re willfully choosing the side ignorance then. I hope you’ll change your mind. Best of luck.

Attack the messenger, ignore the message...

 

[GOilers88]

Not nearly as fascinated as I am with the dogmatic opinions being thrown around by you and others as if they're facts...

If you don't see any reason to trade Chychrun, then you're not looking very hard...

There are several reasons to trade him, whether you feel those reasons justify doing it or not is another story

Those "other decent players" can be vets on 1 year deals... they don't have to be role players making 7+ million over the next 5 - 7 years

There's several reasons not to trade him, too. The biggest one being that you need to draft another Chychrun with one of the many draft picks they have already stockpiled. You have to build around core pieces. Chychrun should absolutely be seen as a core piece that they build around instead of trying to draft him all over again.

If they were going into the next two drafts with very little draft capital I might agree. But unless I'm mistaken they already have a good chunk of it, as well as some good young players they've already developed. Might as well add to him instead of just starting over from nothing again.

 

[Perennial]

Wow, you have no idea what you're talking about and you really doubled down on that. Damn, Chychrun only has 4 years left before he's a UFA. McDavid only has 4 years left before he's a UFA. Better trade these scrubs so we can rebuild properly.

Schmaltz is set to make 25m over 3 years, oh no. Keller is only a 50 point player...yep, definitely these things are true and unbiased and should be taken as fact and there is definitely no reason to not do these things.

Are you even a fan of any of these teams? Are you just doing this to stir up shit? Do you actually think you're completely right and are smarter than every NHL GM?

And you think a 2nd, a potentially decent goalie, and an older forward are the things we should be bringing in? We're rebuilding and should trade all our assets now but we want to trade them for older players without as much upside? You for real? Murray could flop just as easily as succeed, a 2nd would be lucky to even turn into a 50 pt player let alone a better player than Keller/Schmaltz and Nyquist is essentially useless for us.

I wouldn't trade Keller or Schmaltz alone for this. Even if we flipped Nyquist and Murray we wouldn't be getting back more than 3rds and they're worth more than that, let alone to us and our team and counting their upside.

Clearly, I don't think Keller and Schmaltz have much value around the league... or at least they shouldn't

I see them as salary dumps... I thought I made that abundantly clear


Murray is absolute crap... you're definitely not going to get anything for him... he's just a warm body to put in goal during the rebuild years... again, I thought that was obvious


Now, do I think I'm smarter than every NHL GM? Unlikely since "smarter" just means the accumulation of more knowledge, and they've almost certainlyspent many hours studying the league's CBA and salary cap rules... something I have not done

Intelligence is what is used to interpret/process/apply that acquired knowledge...

 

[Perennial]

There's several reasons not to trade him, too. The biggest one being that you need to draft another Chychrun with one of the many draft picks they have already stockpiled. You have to build around core pieces. Chychrun should absolutely be seen as a core piece that they build around instead of trying to draft him all over again.

If they were going into the next two drafts with very little draft capital I might agree. But unless I'm mistaken they already have a good chunk of it, as well as some good young players they've already developed. Might as well add to him instead of just starting over from nothing again.

Of course there are several reasons to keep him... I never said there wasn't

But then you followed that up with another dogmatic opinion...

No, you don't need to draft another Chychrun

You could acquire another Chychrun through trade

Or, you could sign another Chychrun in free-agency (you'll have a lot of cap space with Keller and Schmaltz in Columbus)

Hell, you might even be able to sign the actual Chychrun in 4 years if/when he hits UFA... which at that point you'll be far better positioned for success with all your young high-end talent hitting their prime together

 

[themelkman]

I like your puns personally, the proposals not so much but the thread titles are always fun

 

[GOilers88]

Of course there are several reasons to keep him... I never said there wasn't

But then you followed that up with another dogmatic opinion...

No, you don't need to draft another Chychrun

You could acquire another Chychrun through trade

Or, you could sign another Chychrun in free-agency (you'll have a lot of cap space with Keller and Schmaltz in Columbus)

Hell, you might even be able to sign the actual Chychrun in 4 years if/when he hits UFA... which at that point you'll be far better positioned for success with all your young high-end talent hitting their prime together

Or just keep him through all of this and keep adding assets with the copious amounts of picks they have? Then you don't need to try and find yourself another legit top pairing defenseman? Like you said they'd be moving out plenty of cap space in Keller and Schmaltz. Why subtract a Chychrun only to have to turn around and find him again? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Clearly won't agree here.

 

[YotesFan47]

Keller's contract isn't much worse than Skinner's at this point...

And I've pointed out a couple of times what the back end of Schmaltz's contract looks like

So, if you think those are plus assets worth holding onto while the Yotes hang out at the bottom of the standings for the next half a decade, well, we'll just have to agree to disagree...

That's false, and not just false but telling how little you know about our team. The contract may be rough but it's nowhere near Skinner territory.

I agree that Schmaltz should be traded, we'll do way better than this deal. Schmaltz plays a particular way and he needs to fit your system to be truly useful but he's in no way a bad hockey player. He's a 2c at his best and you wouldn't want him lower than your 3c or he's useless. His salary will get wild but his actual cap is very manageable.

 

[Perennial]

Or just keep him through all of this and keep adding assets with the copious amounts of picks they have? Then you don't need to try and find yourself another legit top pairing defenseman? Like you said they'd be moving out plenty of cap space in Keller and Schmaltz. Why subtract a Chychrun only to have to turn around and find him again? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Clearly won't agree here.

And it's okay that we don't agree...

The difference is I'm not telling you your way is wrong, and that things have to be done a certain way...

I'm just sharing how I would do it

 

[Perennial]

That's false, and not just false but telling how little you know about our team. The contract may be rough but it's nowhere near Skinner territory.

I agree that Schmaltz should be traded, we'll do way better than this deal. Schmaltz plays a particular way and he needs to fit your system to be truly useful but he's in no way a bad hockey player. He's a 2c at his best and you wouldn't want him lower than your 3c or he's useless. His salary will get wild but his actual cap is very manageable.

I was exaggerating Keller's contract for the sake of illustrating my point... he's grossly overpaid given his production

As for Schmaltz, whenever someone says "we'll do a way better deal than this deal", I always ask that they back that up with an actual proposal...

Name the team and the picks/prospects/players they're willing to give up for Schmaltz

 

[YotesFan47]

I was exaggerating Keller's contract for the sake of illustrating my point... he's grossly overpaid given his production

As for Schmaltz, whenever someone says "we'll do a way better deal than this deal", I always ask that they back that up with an actual proposal...

Name the team and the picks/prospects/players they're willing to give up for Schmaltz

I was advocating for a Schmaltz for Dumba deal back before the expansion draft. Some Minny fans were receptive. Wasn't their favorite deal but they didn't hate it kind of deal. I wouldn't do that deal for Dumba today though, circumstances have changed and we need Schmaltz now. Plus I like Schmaltz. If his salary didnt get quite so high, I wouldn't entertain trading him unless an upgrade was coming in. Next summer is the time to move him.

 

[Perennial]

I was advocating for a Schmaltz for Dumba deal back before the expansion draft. Some Minny fans were receptive. Wasn't their favorite deal but they didn't hate it kind of deal. I wouldn't do that deal for Dumba today though, circumstances have changed and we need Schmaltz now. Plus I like Schmaltz. If his salary didnt get quite so high, I wouldn't entertain trading him unless an upgrade was coming in.

From Minnesota's perspective, I wouldn't have considered it...

Also, I'm of the opinion that a rebuilding team that is likely to challenge for last place for the next few seasons doesn't need anything except 5 skaters and a goalie... and even then, 6 skaters and no goalie would be fine as well

Why are you prioritizing an upgrade in a trade when the team is rebuilding and likely to challenge for last place for the next few seasons?

Schmaltz for Kopitar would be an upgrade... how does that help Arizona win the Cup?

 

[YotesFan47]

From Minnesota's perspective, I wouldn't have considered it...

Also, I'm of the opinion that a rebuilding team that is likely to challenge for last place for the next few seasons doesn't need anything except 5 skaters and a goalie... and even then, 6 skaters and no goalie would be fine as well

Why are you prioritizing an upgrade in a trade when the team is rebuilding and likely to challenge for last place for the next few seasons?

Schmaltz for Kopitar would be an upgrade... how does that help Arizona win the Cup?

Bill acquired quality young players and picks over the last 9 months at a really unprecedented rate, which means we'll be ready to compete sooner than most teams entering into a rebuild normally would. Schmaltz still fits the timeline to an extent.

We could cherry pick all the names we want that don't make sense for an upgrade and we obviously aren't going to be chasing a cup in the next few years.

We can't go 10-72, our GM and Coach are in their first contract at the pinnacle of their careers, this would be a huge blemish. Nevermind the fact that the NHL would sanction us again, at the start of our rebuild. Moral among any returning players and staff would be destroyed. We still need to be an NHL hockey team. Schmaltz is fine for us right now, he offers top 6 skill and seems to be a good locker room guy. If a younger upgrade presents its-self and the cost makes sense, we should make that trade. If we can, before next season when his clauses kick in. If we don't, it's not the end of the world.

 

[Perennial]

Bill acquired quality young players and picks over the last 9 months at a really unprecedented rate, which means we'll be ready to compete sooner than most teams entering into a rebuild normally would. Schmaltz still fits the timeline to an extent.

We could cherry pick all the names we want that don't make sense for an upgrade and we obviously aren't going to be chasing a cup in the next few years.

We can't go 10-72, our GM and Coach are in their first contract at the pinnacle of their careers, this would be a huge blemish. Nevermind the fact that the NHL would sanction us again, at the start of our rebuild. Moral among any returning players and staff would be destroyed. We still need to be an NHL hockey team. Schmaltz is fine for us right now, he offers top 6 skill and seems to be a good locker room guy. If a younger upgrade presents its-self and the cost makes sense, we should make that trade. If we can, before next season when his clauses kick in. If we don't, it's not the end of the world.

While I understand the rationale behind keeping him, I don't think his ceiling warrants gambling the future cap space and real dollars owed on him as a player...

He's averaging 46 points per 82 games since joining Arizona... I'm not gambling 8.5 million a year on a player like that

If you wait until next season and his production drops, who's going to trade for him? Again, name the team and the assets going back to Arizona...


As for the first year GM, I can't imagine he said anything during the interview process other than "this team is headed for a rebuild, and that will take multiple seasons of bottoming out for high picks"

So, it should be assumed the owner hired him to execute that multi-year rebuild plan...

 

[YotesFan47]

While I understand the rationale behind keeping him, I don't think his ceiling warrants gambling the future cap space and real dollars owed on him as a player...

He's averaging 46 points per 82 games since joining Arizona... I'm not gambling 8.5 million a year on a player like that

If you wait until next season and his production drops, who's going to trade for him? Again, name the team and the assets going back to Arizona...


As for the first year GM, I can't imagine he said anything during the interview process other than "this team is headed for a rebuild, and that will take multiple seasons of bottoming out for high picks"

So, it should be assumed the owner hired him to execute that multi-year rebuild plan...

46 points, relative to his cap hit, isn't bad. If it's an internal budget problem for a team trading for him, I'm sure the two teams can figure something out.

I expect his production to drop this year, look at our roster. He's not someone that carries a line but he does what he does well. I have no idea what the market will look like, put it on your calendar and ping me.

Our GM probably didn't walk into that interview knowing he was going to pillage as many quality assets as he did either. There is nothing wrong with a team starting off a rebuild very strong and having the luxury of being able to compete sooner than expected. What owner wouldn't love to hear that he'll be able to collect extra money in the playoffs sooner than expected?

I expect this season to be our only tank unless this team has the year of their life, in which case 2 years isn't unreasonable. I'd be mildly surprised if we had a top 10 draft pick in 3 years and if we didn't make the playoffs in 5-6. At which point, Schmaltz contract ends and we need to start paying some ELCs that matter. He's a non issue and we are under our internal cap already. The only angle where he is a problem for us is if we suddenly decide we want to hold a ton of players with high cash costs, for no good reason, over the next 5 years. Losing him hurts our team more, outside of the draft, than his cash cost over 5 years.

 

[Perennial]

46 points, relative to his cap hit, isn't bad. If it's an internal budget problem for a team trading for him, I'm sure the two teams can figure something out.

I expect his production to drop this year, look at our roster. He's not someone that carries a line but he does what he does well. I have no idea what the market will look like, put it on your calendar and ping me.

Our GM probably didn't walk into that interview knowing he was going to pillage as many quality assets as he did either. There is nothing wrong with a team starting off a rebuild very strong and having the luxury of being able to compete sooner than expected. What owner wouldn't love to hear that he'll be able to collect extra money in the playoffs sooner than expected?

I expect this season to be our only tank unless this team has the year of their life, in which case 2 years isn't unreasonable. I'd be mildly surprised if we had a top 10 draft pick in 3 years and if we didn't make the playoffs in 5-6. At which point, Schmaltz contract ends and we need to start paying some ELCs that matter. He's a non issue and we are under our internal cap already. The only angle where he is a problem for us is if we suddenly decide we want to hold a ton of players with high cash costs, for no good reason, over the next 5 years. Losing him hurts our team more, outside of the draft, than his cash cost over 5 years.

I guess we'll see how things play out over the next few years...

I'm on record saying he should be moved ASAP even if it's only for future cap space

You want to keep him around


Meet back here in 4 years and one of us can deliver a very satisfying "I told you so!"