Speculation: Rumour, Trade, and Free Agent Speculation 2018-19 - Part X

[Huffer]

I never said the Jets should so it or that it's fair for both sides. Obviously it doesn't make sense for a contending team to trade impact players rn for some really good question marks.

Just said that's what it would take to pry away 2 blue chip young pieces...

Except it's big overpay. Trouba and Ehlers were themselves 2 blue chip pieces, but they have now proven themselves in the NHL. And they're both young. Both the pick and Bouchard could bust. Or they could both flourish in the NHL, but at this point that's a big unknown. No team is trading away two young proven pieces and hoping that the two pieces they get back MIGHT become as good as them. You need to pay a premium if you are dealing the unproven pieces and this is nowhere close.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Well I sure would like him but one has to wonder why he dropped that far if the choice was that obvious? Maybe he wasn’t TNSE’s choice?

I didn't find any explanation for his drop except that some teams were not looking for Cs. Nothing about attitude or personality. A couple of (IMO) poorer prospect Cs were drafted ahead of him but they were not ridiculous or outrageous picks. For example, Ari took Barret Hayton. Not a bad prospect but not as good as Veleno, IMO. Not good for 5 OA. Dallas took Ty Dellandrea at 13. That fits with Nills reputation as a drafter. It isn't even close. There were a couple of other questionable choices at C and then there was Kupari at 20 OA, who I had as #3 C in the class, after Veleno.

From EP, prior to the draft.

There is so much to like about Joe Veleno. He's a hard-nosed workhorse that makes the players around him better. The fleet-footed center is unselfish and will primarily look to make a play at top speed; however, when the chance arises to put it in the pot himself, he will capitalize. He sees the ice well and is rarely caught out of position. His defensive game is refined and he actively pursues puck control. Transitioning to offence is natural, smooth, and quick. All-in-all, a well-rounded two-way forward that skates well and can be the catalyst a team needs to turn a game in its favor. If he can find the consistency in refusing to let himself get taken out of plays, especially if he doesn't start them, he will thrive and exceed expectations. (Curtis Joe, EP 2017)

I would have been asking for a drug test if Chevy had passed on him.

 

[Gm0ney]

Signing a guy a year early before the 2017-18 season and then spending 2 x 1st round picks, plus Erik Foley and Brendan Lemieux trying to upgrade him at the next two trade deadlines seems like a bit of a waste. Little's signing also handcuffed the Jets when trying to sign Stastny in June. Then Chevy goes and does the same thing with Wheeler last summer. Presumably Wheeler's contract will be in effect before Chevy spends assets to find an upgrade for him, at least...

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Rentals in isolation aren't bad. The problem with the Jets now is that they've burned a lot of assets for basically nothing. Unlikely Hayes stays here, lost Stastny, traded Armia to dump Mason, so we're down a cheap winger relative to his contribution and two first-round picks, plus some mid-round picks for nothing. And we keep buying the same thing at the deadline, 2nd line centre and defensive depth. Why not address these holes in the summer?

The alternative is to use those assets on the trade market to add guys under team control and maybe some futures. Buying rentals isn't terrible, but can't do it every year if we can't retain those guys reasonably long-term. I'd like to see Chevy much more active in June and July, not February.

Good post - but I disagree that buying rentals isn't terrible. It is. The value just isn't there. You need to look at all the rentals not just ours or just the ones that work out. That is the way we evaluate a late 1st. We look at the typical result, not just the best ones.

People like to point out that Stastny was a big success and that we wouldn't have gotten past Nash without him. Well, what if we had gotten Brassard instead? The price would have been about the same. He might actually have made us worse instead of better. Maybe if we hadn't picked up any rental Mau would have got out the blender and found a successful lineup. Who knows? But Brassard was our first target and it looked like we would have gotten him if McPhee hadn't interfered.

 

[DRW204]

Good post - but I disagree that buying rentals isn't terrible. It is. The value just isn't there. You need to look at all the rentals not just ours or just the ones that work out. That is the way we evaluate a late 1st. We look at the typical result, not just the best ones.

People like to point out that Stastny was a big success and that we wouldn't have gotten past Nash without him. Well, what if we had gotten Brassard instead? The price would have been about the same. He might actually have made us worse instead of better. Maybe if we hadn't picked up any rental Mau would have got out the blender and found a successful lineup. Who knows? But Brassard was our first target and it looked like we would have gotten him if McPhee hadn't interfered.

only thing with brassard is we get 2 years out of him. if he's a success we probably dont move for Hayes at this TDL. If he's a failure then we're in the same spot

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

only thing with brassard is we get 2 years out of him. if he's a success we probably dont move for Hayes at this TDL. If he's a failure then we're in the same spot

That was what made him look so attractive last year. But he was a failure as a rental and in the season since too.

 

[Board Bard]

Signing a guy a year early before the 2017-18 season and then spending 2 x 1st round picks, plus Erik Foley and Brendan Lemieux trying to upgrade him at the next two trade deadlines seems like a bit of a waste. Little's signing also handcuffed the Jets when trying to sign Stastny in June. Then Chevy goes and does the same thing with Wheeler last summer. Presumably Wheeler's contract will be in effect before Chevy spends assets to find an upgrade for him, at least...

Starting to read like a comedy of errors, except it's not that funny if you're a Jets fan.

 

[Board Bard]

People like to point out that Stastny was a big success and that we wouldn't have gotten past Nash without him. Well, what if we had gotten Brassard instead?

When Vegas did their Brassard shenanigans it opened the door to Stastny going to the Jets. While at the Jets Stastny likely upped his impending new AAV a bit (half a mil to a mil?) and Vegas ended up paying for it. If Stastny can do something really stupid in the playoffs against the Jets that eliminates that scummy team, the irony would be complete.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

When Vegas did their Brassard shenanigans it opened the door to Stastny going to the Jets. While at the Jets Stastny likely upped his impending new AAV a bit (half a mil to a mil?) and Vegas ended up paying for it. If Stastny can do something really stupid in the playoffs against the Jets that eliminates that scummy team, the irony would be complete.

I'll have one of those.

**** the Knights!

 

[Keystone]

Good post - but I disagree that buying rentals isn't terrible. It is. The value just isn't there. You need to look at all the rentals not just ours or just the ones that work out. That is the way we evaluate a late 1st. We look at the typical result, not just the best ones.

People like to point out that Stastny was a big success and that we wouldn't have gotten past Nash without him. Well, what if we had gotten Brassard instead? The price would have been about the same. He might actually have made us worse instead of better. Maybe if we hadn't picked up any rental Mau would have got out the blender and found a successful lineup. Who knows? But Brassard was our first target and it looked like we would have gotten him if McPhee hadn't interfered.

That was what made him look so attractive last year. But he was a failure as a rental and in the season since too.

A couple things. You and some others are obviously against rentals and have valid arguments. But it seems like you are defending it here with a bunch of “what ifs?” My only concern is what the Winnipeg Jets and Chevy do in terms of rentals and in my opinion and some others, it was successful with Stastny. And even if it was Brassard, we can’t be sure he wouldn’t have been great on the Jets as opposed to the Penguins because he likely would have been used differently.

As for the pick given up. You speak almost in certainties that it’s Velano that was traded. We have no idea if that would be, irregardless of who ranked him where. The 2016 Logan Stanley pick should give pause to that notion because that certainly didn’t match with a lot of lists out there.

That being said, I agree it’s not sustainable and I also hope for a less short sighted solution.

 

[KingBogo]

You are still making your evaluation based on a false premise. On avg, the rentals don't increase your PO run because some are good and some are bad. You are assuming that all are good. I suggest that there are more bad than good. And you are ignoring the fact that the assets given up have the chance to increase your PO run far more times.

You and I are never going to agree on this Mort. Last year I liked the Stastny trade and this season I liked the Hayes deal as well as picking up some depth on defense. And both Stastny and Hayes have made us better teams. The late 1sts we gave up aren't going to make a difference until 4-6 years down the line and the odds are good they will be bottom of the roster players. These are easy to acquire in many different ways. As well pick value projections flattens out pretty good from the late 1st and throughout the 2nd round.

IMO we are at a time to go all in. The last of our older core Buff and Wheeler are still top players and we still have the youngest of our young core on ELC's. With each passing season we will be shedding talent to stay cap compliant. I also expect to recoup picks and prospects as we shed salary. The first by choice will be Trouba, who I expect will return significantly more than we spent on either Stastny or Hayes.

 

[Duke749]

People still harping on Stastny? Really? Guy is 33 and would have cost over a million more a year if not more to keep. Because the same people wouldn’t be criticizing that in some alternate universe.

 

[Duke749]

You and I are never going to agree on this Mort. Last year I liked the Stastny trade and this season I liked the Hayes deal as well as picking up some depth on defense. And both Stastny and Hayes have made us better teams. The late 1sts we gave up aren't going to make a difference until 4-6 years down the line and the odds are good they will be bottom of the roster players. These are easy to acquire in many different ways. As well pick value projections flattens out pretty good from the late 1st and throughout the 2nd round.

IMO we are at a time to go all in. The last of our older core Buff and Wheeler are still top players and we still have the youngest of our young core on ELC's. With each passing season we will be shedding talent to stay cap compliant. I also expect to recoup picks and prospects as we shed salary. The first by choice will be Trouba, who I expect will return significantly more than we spent on either Stastny or Hayes.

People like to be ignorant of the fact that the future of this team is mostly on the roster right now and for the foreseeable future. A couple firsts moved after having two the previous year is not a bad thing. It’s nothing but lazy hindsight thinking.

 

[JetsFan815]

IMO we are at a time to go all in. The last of our older core Buff and Wheeler are still top players and we still have the youngest of our young core on ELC's. With each passing season we will be shedding talent to stay cap compliant. I also expect to recoup picks and prospects as we shed salary. The first by choice will be Trouba, who I expect will return significantly more than we spent on either Stastny or Hayes.

So trade your number 2 d-man for futures while you trade futures for rentals like Stastny and Hayes? That does not sound like either an "all in" move or a "window extending" move. Having Trouba or Trouba equivalent is orders of magnitude more important to the long term health of this club than a couple of runs with rental Centers. The Trouba return is not a substitute for the assets given up for the rentals, that return should be used to get a d-man to replace Trouba now. Can't have it both ways, either this is the group to go "all in" with and therefore should be supplemented with a proper Trouba replacement not futures or it's not.

Those late 1st round picks will have a lot less to do with keeping open a contention window, then the aging out of players like Buff and Wheeler. And making decisions on what current star players we can afford to keep and which ones need to be moved due to cap constraints. Our window is open now, and we will never likely be in a spot again where so much of our talent is paid under market rates.

And as I mentioned earlier TNSE will want to start show casing it's 1/4 billion investment in True North Square. Cup fever and spring weather will be very good for business both in the short and long term.

Those 1sts can be used to acquire players to supplement multiple years of the contention window and Buff and Wheeler before they age. I am not saying the Jets should've made this trade but Ryan O'Rielly went for a 1st, 2nd, Tage Thompson, Sobotka and Berglund (capdump), an equivalent offer from the Jets would have been our 2019 1st, 2nd, Lemieux, Perreault which would buy 5 years of services of ROR, enough to supplement Scheifele/Wheeler contracts here, instead of 1 playoff run with Hayes if we can't re-sign him. Now the Jets may not have wanted that trade for cap or a variety of reasons but the point remains that those assets can be part of a package to acquire long term player in the summer rather than rentals.

To your 2nd point I fundamentally disagree with making hockey operations decisions with potential long term impact based on potential short term financial/PR boon. We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Whileee]

What would you guys want for Trouba in the summer?

He's probably gonna want to leave and we'd need to ask him if he's willing to sign long term in Edmonton first. If he is I'd like to make a move.

Only things off the table are McDrai.

I see he has 44 points rn, is he a good #1pp option and can he move the puck up? Ik he's a stud defensively.

Klefbom + 2nd? Maybe our 1st?

If Trouba would be willing to sign in Edmonton, the Jets would likely sign him instead.

 

[KingBogo]

So trade your number 2 d-man for futures while you trade futures for rentals like Stastny and Hayes? That does not sound like either an "all in" move or a "window extending" move. Having Trouba or Trouba equivalent is orders of magnitude more important to the long term health of this club than a couple of runs with rental Centers. The Trouba return is not a substitute for the assets given up for the rentals, that return should be used to get a d-man to replace Trouba now. Can't have it both ways, either this is the group to go "all in" with and therefore should be supplemented with a proper Trouba replacement not futures or it's not.



Those 1sts can be used to acquire players to supplement multiple years of the contention window and Buff and Wheeler before they age. I am not saying the Jets should've made this trade but Ryan O'Rielly went for a 1st, 2nd, Tage Thompson, Sobotka and Berglund (capdump), an equivalent offer from the Jets would have been our 2019 1st, 2nd, Lemieux, Perreault which would buy 5 years of services of ROR, enough to supplement Scheifele/Wheeler contracts here, instead of 1 playoff run with Hayes if we can't re-sign him. Now the Jets may not have wanted that trade for cap or a variety of reasons but the point remains that those assets can be part of a package to acquire long term player in the summer rather than rentals.

To your 2nd point I fundamentally disagree with making hockey operations decisions with potential long term impact based on potential short term financial/PR boon. We will have to agree to disagree.

To the bolded, you don't own the business or have $100's of millions invested in developing a full city block in downtown Winnipeg. Retail space that needs to be leased, residential space that needs to be sold and a partner with hotel rooms that need to be rented. I'm guessing the conversation in the boardroom about operations doesn't start with in 4-6 years when that pick is ready to take on the 3rd line checking role let's then go all in.

And Trouba's value is impacted by him angling his way to UFA status at the earliest possible opportunity. The return will be along the lines of Karlsson but a lesser amount. Basically a 1 year rental.

 

[tbcwpg]

So trade your number 2 d-man for futures while you trade futures for rentals like Stastny and Hayes? That does not sound like either an "all in" move or a "window extending" move. Having Trouba or Trouba equivalent is orders of magnitude more important to the long term health of this club than a couple of runs with rental Centers. The Trouba return is not a substitute for the assets given up for the rentals, that return should be used to get a d-man to replace Trouba now. Can't have it both ways, either this is the group to go "all in" with and therefore should be supplemented with a proper Trouba replacement not futures or it's not.

I'm sure they'd prefer to trade Trouba, but the possible Trouba trade is only based on his desire to not want to re-sign long-term in Winnipeg (allegedly). I don't think the trades for Stastny and Hayes are because they think they can get it back with a Trouba trade, I think they make those deals anyway. In fact, I think the possibility of having to possibly trade him spurs on the desire to make a big push for the Cup before he goes.

The going rate right now for a d-man in Trouba's position is the Karlsson deal. One more year to UFA, unsigned. I figure you have to maybe add a little bit to the expected return to account for the Dorion getting fleeced factor, but deduct the same amount because Trouba isn't Karlsson. A team with the desire to trade for Trouba with the hope of "courting" him for a season is going to be a good one, and not willing to give up too much in the way of roster players.

Those 1sts can be used to acquire players to supplement multiple years of the contention window and Buff and Wheeler before they age. I am not saying the Jets should've made this trade but Ryan O'Rielly went for a 1st, 2nd, Tage Thompson, Sobotka and Berglund (capdump), an equivalent offer from the Jets would have been our 2019 1st, 2nd, Lemieux, Perreault which would buy 5 years of services of ROR, enough to supplement Scheifele/Wheeler contracts here, instead of 1 playoff run with Hayes if we can't re-sign him. Now the Jets may not have wanted that trade for cap or a variety of reasons but the point remains that those assets can be part of a package to acquire long term player in the summer rather than rentals.

The Blues and the Jets situations are different so you can't say "The Jets could've done something like X", because trades are never made in a vacuum. You say that the Jets may not have wanted to make that trade for a variety of reasons - if you accept that the reasons are valid and reasonable, then it doesn't matter what another team with another set of circumstances did with their deals.

The Oilers traded a 1st for Griffin Reinhart. He had term, so you'd probably say that was a better deal than trading a later 1st for a rental? If we're only going by those criteria.

To your 2nd point I fundamentally disagree with making hockey operations decisions with potential long term impact based on potential short term financial/PR boon. We will have to agree to disagree.

That's a valid point to take as a fan, but a business has more to consider than that. I think TNSE will see a three round playoff run as more beneficial for the Jets overall as a business, and a franchise in Winnipeg, than whether Joe Veleno could've stepped into the number 2 C role in 4-6 years.

 

[Board Bard]

To the bolded, you don't own the business or have $100's of millions invested in developing a full city block in downtown Winnipeg. Retail space that needs to be leased, residential space that needs to be sold and a partner with hotel rooms that need to be rented. I'm guessing the conversation in the boardroom about operations doesn't start with in 4-6 years when that pick is ready to take on the 3rd line checking role let's then go all in.

And Trouba's value is impacted by him angling his way to UFA status at the earliest possible opportunity. The return will be along the lines of Karlsson but a lesser amount. Basically a 1 year rental.

The fortunes of the Jets don't have a thing to do with renting out retail and office space in a nearby building.

 

[Atoyot]

I know it'll never happen, but man would we a perfect fit for Adam Fox. Contender in desperate need of RHDs.

 

[Whileee]

I know it'll never happen, but man would we a perfect fit for Adam Fox. Contender in desperate need of RHDs.

My prediction - Samberg will be a better NHL D than Fox.

 

[Atoyot]

My prediction - Samberg will be a better NHL D than Fox.

Wouldn't shock me, which is why we desperately need RHD, and not LHD

 

[GNP]

The fortunes of the Jets don't have a thing to do with renting out retail and office space in a nearby building.

_______________________________________________________

I agree with Bogo that everything TNSE does is interrelated to the long term success of the Jets. The more financially stable the ownership group is, the more stable the Jet's will be over the long run.

I hope the new development TNSE is doing comes off very successful, and if it's like other things they do, I'm sure it will be. Hope so.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

At the end of the day it seems Chevy is going to rent higher end talent when he feels the time is right which has been the last two years. He said as much a few years back when he was asked if he would spend to rent at any point and he referenced the organization getting two extra first round picks (Stanley and Roslo) so they had room to deal firsts when needed. I found that interesting at the time because it indicated they didn’t have the “ridged” D&D model I had built up in my mind and it was obviously much more flexible. In Chevy’s asset managment strategy rental players are obviously part of it as contentious as that seems to be.

Yeah, I remember that now. I didn't like the logic then either. Having paid good assets to get those "extra" 1sts does not mean you can now toss them away lightly.

Every team starts with exactly the same 'bank' of assets, 7 draft picks every year. Obviously the early picks are worth a lot more than the late ones, but over a period of years that will even out as teams move up and down the standings.

The point is that there isn't any more and no one gets less. Yes, there are a few undrafted FAs but they are too few in number and usually too low in quality to be significant in the big picture. There are reasons why they were undrafted.

Teams can keep those picks or trade them. They can trade the players they get with them early in their careers or late. Or they can keep them until they are no longer able to play. They can do anything they want with them but they can't buy, build or steal any more than those 210, now 217, soon to be 224 picks.

So it all comes down to getting the most value out of those 7 draft picks per year. If a team can get its hands on more than its share of the high ones they need to make the most of that opportunity. Not regard them as some kind of freebies to be gambled with or spent frivolously.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

agree with you on the 2C hole
disagree with the def depth

how many Morrow's, Beaulieu's, Bogdan's should they carry for the full year? they buy defenders for low prices at the TDL for injury insurance during the POs not to address holes

Depth rentals acquired for low value assets, like 6-7th rd picks, are a very different story than the expensive ones acquired to fill holes.

 

[ps241]

Yeah, I remember that now. I didn't like the logic then either. Having paid good assets to get those "extra" 1sts does not mean you can now toss them away lightly.

Every team starts with exactly the same 'bank' of assets, 7 draft picks every year. Obviously the early picks are worth a lot more than the late ones, but over a period of years that will even out as teams move up and down the standings.

The point is that there isn't any more and no one gets less. Yes, there are a few undrafted FAs but they are too few in number and usually too low in quality to be significant in the big picture. There are reasons why they were undrafted.

Teams can keep those picks or trade them. They can trade the players they get with them early in their careers or late. Or they can keep them until they are no longer able to play. They can do anything they want with them but they can't buy, build or steal any more than those 210, now 217, soon to be 224 picks.

So it all comes down to getting the most value out of those 7 draft picks per year. If a team can get its hands on more than its share of the high ones they need to make the most of that opportunity. Not regard them as some kind of freebies to be gambled with or spent frivolously.

I didn’t sense he was being frivolous with his statement though. It felt to me at least like he wasn’t planning on waisting them but just values rentals at the deadline on certain years more than the majority of posters on this thread. One thing we may be undervaluing is the wage leveraging aspect of getting a really good asset under the cap. Hayes or Stastny were both really nice top 6 players that we get to pay a fraction of the price for and use for the most important part of the season at a highly reduced AAV hit. It’s a shrewd tactic to talent stack and yes it comes at a price.

There is a reason smart GM’s that don’t have a gun to their head to win now still chose to improve their team heading into a playoff run.

In the case of the Jets I doubt we are going to have the cap space to play this game over the next couple of seasons anyways. My guess is we start using our late 1sts again and find our way back to a slightly more balanced approach. For all we know Hayes gets extended or Trouba gets dealt for picks this year.

To be clear I don’t like spending first round picks but I do have more faith in Chevy than some here. He is not perfect but he wins allot more battles than he loses. This comes down to the fact Chevy views it more dynamically than many people on the board and he is going to horde extra picks at times and spend picks at times depending on the situation. It seems like he feels that will give the Jets the best shot at winning a championship at some point over his tenure. If we do this again next season then I reserve the right to change my opinion but for now I will let it play out.