The Free Agency/Trades Thread (Proposals, Speculation, Rumors) II

[mpp9]

Pens fan here. You hear anything about Matt Cullen coming back? And does he have anything left in a lesser role? Thanks.

 

[Infinite Jest]

Pens fan here. You hear anything about Matt Cullen coming back? And does he have anything left in a lesser role? Thanks.

He is not coming back to Nashville, Preds have zero interest in him. He was okay last year, nothing more than a 3rd liner now. Pretty good defensively and still has some speed.

 

[Drake744]

Cullen probably has a bit left, but he won't be back here.

 

[mpp9]

We're looking for a vet 4C. Seems like a good fit for us looking at his faceoff numbers and decent production last year. Just wanted to see if he fell off a cliff this year or not.

Thanks.

 

[gela]

We're looking for a vet 4C. Seems like a good fit for us looking at his faceoff numbers and decent production last year. Just wanted to see if he fell off a cliff this year or not.

Thanks.

Nah he'd probably be fine for you in that role, he's just very slow and the preds don't have interest in bringing him back. Not sure if he's retiring or not. I'd heard he's only open to playing in Minnesota, but I haven't exactly been following up on him.

 

[Drake744]

I've also heard the "I'll keep playing....if it's in Minnesota" stuff also, but we'll see how true that is when teams start throwing money in his face.

 

[Byrddog]

Byrd, I know your hate on Smith is legendary, but c'mon, if you're trying to make a serious point you can't throw out "stupid stuff" like Smith is barely a top 6. 180 in points last year - which means there are Dmen in the group so it's not even all the top 6 - is Barkov with 16 and 20 for 36 points. Smith is clearly in that group without any question. Would I like to have enough firepower we could skate him on our 3rd? You bet. But, he's certainly an acceptable top 6 piece for a strong team.

Last season there were 92 players with more than 20 goals in the league with 23 Smith is tied for 58th thru 67 in the league Wilsons 20 put him tied for 83 thru 91 . Smiths 44 points put him tied for 100th thru 106. In the western Confrence Smiths point total was 48th and Wilsons was 51st. In the West Smiths GPG was 28th and Wilsons 41st.

For arguments sake there are 8 teams from the west making the playoffs meaning there are 48 wings on the top two lines making the playoffs. Smith is at the bottom of the top 48 and Wilson misses at 51 this cut in points. And this presumes that the top 8 teams have the best in the conference. We should all agree that success of wingers has a correlation to doing well in the playoffs. If one considers GPG for playoff bound wingers Smith is 28th and Wilson 41st. So statistically both players are in the bottom half of ranking playoff bound wingers for last year. If you look at FF( he stands 17th in GPG and 16th in points in this group and Neal is tied with Smith in GPG at 28 and at 64 in points. All things considered Neal had the most disappointing season of the three but with thee of the 4 top 6 wingers below the 50 percentile in these categories one can conclude this is an issue that needs to be upgraded. Barring injury Neal should rebound to past numbers, Smith and Wilson are so streaky they could bot put up 25 and 50 or fall flat and be below 20 and 40 points.

This is a complicated way to evaluate where players really are in relation to others at the position and does support my broad statement that neither Smith or Wilson would be in a top 6 role for a WCC or STC team. They are good enough to play on teams ranked 6 thru 8 in most cases but there numbers will need to improve or this team can not advance or the position needs to be upgraded. There will be someone that will post but the Preds finished higher than 6 thur 8 last year and while that is true one must put the credit there on Rinne who was 2nd in the west behind Dubnyk in GGA in the west which really means he was atop the west even with his struggle at the end, he was also behind only Price and Dubnyk when you look at the entire league. The was the difference in 6 thru 8 and 3rd in the conference where they finished.

So again I say paying either Smith or Wilson 3 mil on this bridge will come back to bite Poile perhaps not during the bridge deal but doubtless when they become UFA and ask for 5 mil per if they can up there game and improve there performance over the last two years. Not a chance I think he should take. And quite possibly the reason they are not signed right now.

 

[Drake744]

Last season there were 92 players with more than 20 goals in the league with 23 Smith is tied for 58th thru 67 in the league Wilsons 20 put him tied for 83 thru 91 .

Smith was tied for the 15th most goals last year. Yeah a lot of players scored 23 or more, but as far as total number of goals players ended up with, only 14 numbers were higher than what Smith got.

 

[Byrddog]

Smith was tied for the 15th most goals last year. Yeah a lot of players scored 23 or more, but as far as total number of goals players ended up with, only 14 numbers were higher than what Smith got.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/points/sort/goals/year/2015/seasontype/2

I have no idea where your 15th number came from.

 

[Ranskyre]

http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/points/sort/goals/year/2015/seasontype/2

I have no idea where your 15th number came from.

Look at the number of goals as a bracket, he's in the 15th bracket of goal scorers.

Also, he's one goal above Hossa and only two below Kessel.

 

[NSH615]

Look at the number of goals as a bracket, he's in the 15th bracket of goal scorers.

Also, he's one goal above Hossa and only two below Kessel.

Exactly, for Smith one goal makes a difference of 8 spots.

 

[Byrddog]

Look at the number of goals as a bracket, he's in the 15th bracket of goal scorers.

Also, he's one goal above Hossa and only two below Kessel.

Wow that takes stats to a whole new level looking at goals as a standard deviation proves nothing. If you have a body temp of 101 and 15 others have a team of 107 who gets brain damage quicker?

 

[NSH615]

Wow that takes stats to a whole new level looking at goals as a standard deviation proves nothing. If you have a body temp of 101 and 15 others have a team of 107 who gets brain damage quicker?

By your logic then, James Neal and Eric Staal are barely a top 6'ers (Same # of goals as Smith). Along with Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (only had 1 more goal as Smith). And what about Matt Duchene (21 goals)?

 

[Byrddog]

By your logic then, James Neal and Eric Staal are barely a top 6'ers (Same # of goals as Smith). Along with Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (only had 1 more goal as Smith). And what about Matt Duchene (21 goals)?

Lasts years performance yes they were. You must consider both goals and assists however just as I did Duchane had 21 goals and 34 assist which makes him more valuabe. Just the same as Ribs who had 15 goals but 47 assts they both contributed more offense to there team than Smith or Wilson.

Also comparing centers to wings is not a good comparison most centers make there living by assists. Feeding there wingers who can finish but that brings up a whole other can of worms.

 

[Smashville Spence52]

Of course we can get more in the trade, I'm saying we need to trade for a net front presence in general, you add the other pieces in after that. If you think I would trade all that just for one player you obviously don't think. Like say it was for hornquist, throw in a solid prospect and a 1st or second, would they trade him probably not but we need a guy like that back

 

[Byrddog]

Exactly, for Smith one goal makes a difference of 8 spots.

Then tell me how many individuals had more than 23 goals in the league was it 14 or 57

 

[Drake744]

Then tell me how many individuals had more than 23 goals in the league was it 14 or 57

You (and every stat website out there) are focusing too much on the number of players instead of the actual goal production. This is a long standing pet peeve of mine. 57 players scored more than 23 goals, yet if you group everyone who scored a certain number as equally productive, only 14 players or groups of players put the puck in the net more than Smith.

The rank shouldn't be compared with players, it should be compared with numbers.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Of course we can get more in the trade, I'm saying we need to trade for a net front presence in general, you add the other pieces in after that. If you think I would trade all that just for one player you obviously don't think. Like say it was for hornquist, throw in a solid prospect and a 1st or second, would they trade him probably not but we need a guy like that back

You don't trade a piece like Jones, much less what you added to it, to return a player who will front the net for you. Adding a prospect and a pick back to us doesn't change that it would be fundamentally poor asset management from our end to pursue such a trade.

 

[Byrddog]

You're focusing too much on the number of players instead of the actual goal production. 57 players scored more than 23 goals, yet if you group everyone who scored a certain number as equally productive, only 14 players or groups of players were more productive goal scorers than where Smith falls .

This type thinking is akin to grading on a curve. A policy I never agreed witrh in college and too great pride in a number of time being the one that ruined the curve. But to lump players into groups due to a common number is disingenuous. One who does this thinks that the person with 23 goals tied for 15th is closer to OV who had 53 than someone who had 12 goals and is 30th by your standard. I find no usefull ness in this matter than to try to make a player look better among there peers when in reality they are not. I stated Smith had the 58th most goals which if fact even though he is tied with 8 others and I could have said he was actually tied for 67th in the league which is a fact also. These are individual numbers and fall where they may. to group does not give one a actual view of worth in cases like this. Only to falsely inflate. At the right price Smith and Wilson both have value to this team but to use fuzzy math like he was 15th in the league in scoring is well just not truthful.

 

[Drake744]

I stated Smith had the 58th most goals which if fact even though he is tied with 8 others and I could have said he was actually tied for 67th in the league which is a fact also. These are individual numbers and fall where they may. to group does not give one a actual view of worth in cases like this. Only to falsely inflate. At the right price Smith and Wilson both have value to this team but to use fuzzy math like he was 15th in the league in scoring is well just not truthful.

In order to be ranked 58th in a list of...i don't know...how many t shirts you own, you have to have 57 people with more t shirts than you.

If the league leader in goals was

Ovechkin: 55
Stamkos: 54
Crosby: 54
Tavares: 53

Crosby would be tied for second, not in third place. Smith is tied for 15th. How is this not accurate?

 

[Byrddog]

In order to be ranked 58th in a list of...i don't know...how many t shirts you own, you have to have 57 people with more t shirts than you.

If the league leader in goals was

Ovechkin: 55
Stamkos: 54
Crosby: 54
Tavares: 53

Crosby would be tied for second, not in third place. Smith is tied for 15th. How is this not accurate?

Therefore Smith is the 15th best scorer in the league damn Poile you better hurry and sign him before he gets a offersheet of 6 mil.

 

[NSH615]

Then tell me how many individuals had more than 23 goals in the league was it 14 or 57

To be fair and not ignore your question, 57 players.

This type thinking is akin to grading on a curve. A policy I never agreed witrh in college and too great pride in a number of time being the one that ruined the curve. But to lump players into groups due to a common number is disingenuous. One who does this thinks that the person with 23 goals tied for 15th is closer to OV who had 53 than someone who had 12 goals and is 30th by your standard. I find no usefull ness in this matter than to try to make a player look better among there peers when in reality they are not. I stated Smith had the 58th most goals which if fact even though he is tied with 8 others and I could have said he was actually tied for 67th in the league which is a fact also. These are individual numbers and fall where they may. to group does not give one a actual view of worth in cases like this. Only to falsely inflate. At the right price Smith and Wilson both have value to this team but to use fuzzy math like he was 15th in the league in scoring is well just not truthful.

This all started because you were talking about top 6 production. You then used his tied for 58th rank in goals scored as an argument that he didn't belong in the top 6. Using that argument one could say that James Neal, Eric Staal (both had same # of Goals), Jakub Voracek and Marian Hossa(1 less goal), Matt Duchene, and Chris Kreider (2 less goals) and Ryan Kessler (3 less goals) all should not be in the top 6.

You (and every stat website out there) are focusing too much on the number of players instead of the actual goal production. This is a long standing pet peeve of mine. 57 players scored more than 23 goals, yet if you group everyone who scored a certain number as equally productive, only 14 players or groups of players put the puck in the net more than Smith.

The rank shouldn't be compared with players, it should be compared with numbers.

I agree 100%. The rankings can be used for awards, but that's really it. Production and really what level of production and how many production levels there are should be what is looked at.

 

[glenngineer]

I like to use goals per game or assists per game or points per game to evaluate players. It takes in to account games played/missed.

The thing I don't get about Byrd's point here is, you take in to account how our guys look against the top 8 teams in the West but you have an entire league you should be basing your stats off of. The other thing is, the West is a stronger conference so that will skew the stats some as well.

Let's take this discussion to the complete absurdity that I like to do, what if you had 12 forwards that all scored 20 goals per season. None would be top 6 forwards by this account but you'd amass almost 3 goals per game. Would that be a bad thing? Completely unrealistic I know but just thought I'd throw that out there to make a point.

 

[Smashville Spence52]

You don't trade a piece like Jones, much less what you added to it, to return a player who will front the net for you. Adding a prospect and a pick back to us doesn't change that it would be fundamentally poor asset management from our end to pursue such a trade.

Well did you see how we were on the power play? Did you see that losing horquinst hurt pretty bad??? I mean yall think long term, and that's good but right is a good shot for us to win a cup. We were one huge injury away from putting Chicago out.

 

[NSH615]

Well did you see how we were on the power play? Did you see that losing horquinst hurt pretty bad??? I mean yall think long term, and that's good but right is a good shot for us to win a cup. We were one huge injury away from putting Chicago out.

The point was you don't trade Jones for a player like that. If Jones was traded for a player like that, Poile would be escorted out of 501 Broadway 1 second later. Yes we need a player like that, but Jones for that player is not the answer. I do not want Jones traded period, but if he is traded it should be for a young #1C Period, nothing else.

And BTW, trading Jones in your scenario does not help the PP, it creates just as big of a hole on it as it helps it.