Speculation: Sellers at the Deadline?

[teknics]

BUY BUY BUY!!!!

Indio oats.

Let's see if anyone gets the reference.

 

[tjcurrie]

Does Klingberg play his off side on defense?

He's a righty who plays the right side. Can't really think of him playing the left.

 

[ScaredStreit]

Picks for vets?

Most of our vets have little to no value, some even have negative value. Other than Clutterbuck, Greiss, and Seidenberg I can't see any playoff team wanting any of them.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

Most of our vets have little to no value, some even have negative value. Other than Clutterbuck, Greiss, and Seidenberg I can't see any playoff team wanting any of them.

I meant our picks for other teams' vets. You know, be buyers at the deadline.

 

[Rhino1985]

Can someone explain the fetish fo trading away Hamonic? In a cap world when you have too much baggage already, you need to have guys like Travis signed to sweetheart deals, and we do. I know this season sucks and he hasn't helped that much, but if you move him you will backfill with a worse and more expensive defenseman. Fail!

Because the very contract you mention makes him attractive to other teams, therefore ensuring us a better player in return?

You have to give to get. No one wants Bailey, Strome, Kulemin, or Hickey. At some point, we are going to have to move a good player in order to get one.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

Because the very contract you mention makes him attractive to other teams, therefore ensuring us a better player in return?

You have to give to get. No one wants Bailey, Strome, Kulemin, or Hickey. At some point, we are going to have to move a good player in order to get one.

But you didn't answer the question. Using your logic we should trade Tavares tomorrow. But yet you would probably admit that's a bad idea.

And if you think 1 or even 2 new faces are going to fix this club you are dead wrong. The issues begin with the GM, and the coaching staff. I don't care how many moves you make, they suck and are anchors around the neck of the club at this point. Fix that first, see what results from it, then make on ice personnel decisions.

 

[GrandmaSlices51631]

But you didn't answer the question. Using your logic we should trade Tavares tomorrow. But yet you would probably admit that's a bad idea.

And if you think 1 or even 2 new faces are going to fix this club you are dead wrong. The issues begin with the GM, and the coaching staff. I don't care how many moves you make, they suck and are anchors around the neck of the club at this point. Fix that first, see what results from it, then make on ice personnel decisions.

I concur regarding personnel.

For some reason you've failed to acknowledge why Hamonic is discussed as a trade chip, even though numerous posters including myself have given, if not compelling, logical reasons as to why.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

I concur regarding personnel.

For some reason you've failed to acknowledge why Hamonic is discussed as a trade chip, even though numerous posters including myself have given, if not compelling, logical reasons as to why.

It isn't a compelling logical reason. You guys are the ones missing the obvious problem in your suggestion: the very same reason he is attractive to another club is the very same reason he is more attractive, to us, staying here.

And the deal you suggest screws us. We will remove an important piece from our defense, and replace it with worse. Hamonic plays how many minutes? 20+ a night? And you bring in a guy who plays 16 a night? Sure, F vs D, it isn't straight up an apple to an apple, but what you gain up front you lose at the very minimum evenly in the backend.

It is not logical. You need to improve, not stay the same or get worse, and odds are we would get worse.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

It isn't a compelling logical reason. You guys are the ones missing the obvious problem in your suggestion: the very same reason he is attractive to another club is the very same reason he is more attractive, to us, staying here.

And the deal you suggest screws us. We will remove an important piece from our defense, and replace it with worse. Hamonic plays how many minutes? 20+ a night? And you bring in a guy who plays 16 a night? Sure, F vs D, it isn't straight up an apple to an apple, but what you gain up front you lose at the very minimum evenly in the backend.

It is not logical. You need to improve, not stay the same or get worse, and odds are we would get worse.

Yes! Yes!! Yes!!!



Thank you.

 

[GrandmaSlices51631]

It isn't a compelling logical reason. You guys are the ones missing the obvious problem in your suggestion: the very same reason he is attractive to another club is the very same reason he is more attractive, to us, staying here.

And the deal you suggest screws us. We will remove an important piece from our defense, and replace it with worse. Hamonic plays how many minutes? 20+ a night? And you bring in a guy who plays 16 a night? Sure, F vs D, it isn't straight up an apple to an apple, but what you gain up front you lose at the very minimum evenly in the backend.

It is not logical. You need to improve, not stay the same or get worse, and odds are we would get worse.

I didn't say it was both. If it was compelling I wouldn't have to convince you otherwise. We've agreed to disagree on this topic. I don't know how you can make it as simple as "16 minutes vs 20 minutes" as the counter to that is "30 goals vs 5 goals" but sure, if thats how you see it.

Maybe Hamonic is playing off due to the thumb injury but maybe, just maybe, he isn't as good as we think he is. Some of the decision making this season has been questionable at best. I like his toughness and work in the crease area but the zone clears have been flat out bad, alot of those pucks are held at the line by opposing D. I sure hope it doesn't become a trend.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

I didn't say it was both. If it was compelling I wouldn't have to convince you otherwise. We've agreed to disagree on this topic. I don't know how you can make it as simple as "16 minutes vs 20 minutes" as the counter to that is "30 goals vs 5 goals" but sure, if thats how you see it.

Maybe Hamonic is playing off due to the thumb injury but maybe, just maybe, he isn't as good as we think he is. Some of the decision making this season has been questionable at best. I like his toughness and work in the crease area but the zone clears have been flat out bad, alot of those pucks are held at the line by opposing D. I sure hope it doesn't become a trend.

Grandma - Maybe it is me not communicating well, but you are still not seeing my point. If you cut Hamonic off our blueline we lose our best defensive shut down defenseman, who is mobile as well. Ok, so you improve the forwards. Great, BUT you now have created a big ******* hole on defense and what will you fill it in with?

Tweener AHL dude?
A rookie who is not a shutdown defenseman?
An expensive FA that we can't afford anyway?

How are you going to make this work when we are balls to the cap ceiling? The only way to do it is to make the defense weaker which would be a bad thing. You are filling a hole in your yard by creating a hole somewhere else that is not even arguable more critical, but flat out more critical! That is bad personnel management.

Or maybe you think defense is for stupid people. Idk. I am scratching my head over why you seem to have zero respect for what it takes to grow a successful playoff squad, and that starts from the net and grows out from there - Goal, defense, center, wings, in that order.

You are trying to buy a nice ring finger by sacrificing a thumb. Does that make sense? If you think Hamonic sucks then ok, I can see where you are coming from to a degree, but then it fails because if he does suck, what do you expect to get back for him? Most GMs are smart enough not to get hosed like Mike Milbury did, regularly. Odds are you will flip Travis, if he sucks which I disagree with, for Kunitz. Yeah, no thanks.

 

[GrandmaSlices51631]

Grandma - Maybe it is me not communicating well, but you are still not seeing my point. If you cut Hamonic off our blueline we lose our best defensive shut down defenseman, who is mobile as well. Ok, so you improve the forwards. Great, BUT you now have created a big ******* hole on defense and what will you fill it in with?

It's a temporary sacrifice. You still have CdH, Leddy and Boychuk. I wasn't big on DeHaan last year, but he's proved me wrong in many ways. That does in fact leave a void in the top 4. One I think Pelech or Pulock is more then capable of growing into.

Tweener AHL dude?

I assume this is Mayfield your referring to?

A rookie who is not a shutdown defenseman?

This could only be Pulock. He's no shutdown guy, but he is more then mobile. I think his vision and puck moving ability could off-set his deficiencies, at least in the short term.

An expensive FA that we can't afford anyway?

At no point in time suggested this. Or Pelech who has been defensively sound and poised in virtually all the games we've seen him. Or we could just leave him in the AHL or pressbox to rot.

How are you going to make this work when we are balls to the cap ceiling? The only way to do it is to make the defense weaker which would be a bad thing. You are filling a hole in your yard by creating a hole somewhere else that is not even arguable more critical, but flat out more critical! That is bad personnel management.

Or maybe you think defense is for stupid people. Idk. I am scratching my head over why you seem to have zero respect for what it takes to grow a successful playoff squad, and that starts from the net and grows out from there - Goal, defense, center, wings, in that order.

Yes I think defense is for "Stupid People", you got it. I have tons of respect for what it takes to grow a "playoff squad". This D-Core got EMBARRASSED by Tampa Bay last year, you know what I see on their team? Speed up front, scoring depth. They beat us 4 consecutive games, this blueline was no match for Tampas run-and-gun approach. Hamonic is not Hedman, even if we've put him a similar role.

You are trying to buy a nice ring finger by sacrificing a thumb. Does that make sense? If you think Hamonic sucks then ok, I can see where you are coming from to a degree, but then it fails because if he does suck, what do you expect to get back for him? Most GMs are smart enough not to get hosed like Mike Milbury did, regularly. Odds are you will flip Travis, if he sucks which I disagree with, for Kunitz. Yeah, no thanks.

I don't think he "sucks", I just think many of us have our homer goggles on. Myself included, I've looked at his play more objectively and compared it to guys on other successful teams in a similar role and the writing is on the wall. He is still perceived as a valuable asset, just because I think he is a liability from time to time doesn't mean other GM's in the league don't covet him. Stats won't tell the whole story but he is dead last on the team in +/-. Getting tough assignments is a factor, so I won't put that fact on a billboard.

We really don't have to agree on this. Ideally, we keep Hamonic AND one of the youngsters in the fold establish themselves as the winger JT desperately needs. If I suggest we trade CdH+ for a top-line wing I'll still get reamed around here so obviously a top line wing is still of little priority to certain posters. The concept of dealing from a position of strength is incomprehensible to some people.

 

[A Pointed Stick]

It's a temporary sacrifice. You still have CdH, Leddy and Boychuk. I wasn't big on DeHaan last year, but he's proved me wrong in many ways. That does in fact leave a void in the top 4. One I think Pelech or Pulock is more then capable of growing into.

Pelech one day if he keeps improving but he isn't there yet. I would say the same for Mayfield but I feel like I am one of three posters on this board who see a 2nd pair ceiling for him. Most think he is at best a 3rd pair.

I assume this is Mayfield your referring to?

Yes.

This could only be Pulock. He's no shutdown guy, but he is more then mobile. I think his vision and puck moving ability could off-set his deficiencies, at least in the short term.

Exactly, he is no shutdown guy.

Yes I think defense is for "Stupid People", you got it. I have tons of respect for what it takes to grow a "playoff squad". This D-Core got EMBARRASSED by Tampa Bay last year, you know what I see on their team? Speed up front, scoring depth. They beat us 4 consecutive games, this blueline was no match for Tampas run-and-gun approach. Hamonic is not Hedman, even if we've put him a similar role.

We beat them the first game, so they adjusted. Our problem is a coach with two tools in his toolbox. An adjustment for him requires 3 months of meetings, retreats, aroma rock therapy....

I don't think he "sucks", I just think many of us have our homer goggles on. Myself included, I've looked at his play more objectively and compared it to guys on other successful teams in a similar role and the writing is on the wall. He is still perceived as a valuable asset, just because I think he is a liability from time to time doesn't mean other GM's in the league don't covet him. Stats won't tell the whole story but he is dead last on the team in +/-. Getting tough assignments is a factor, so I won't put that fact on a billboard.

I am ok with the flesh you added. You didn't mention his cap hit though and that is a big dimension to this.