Speculation: 2015 - 2016 Coyotes Roster - Part 7

[Ebb]

Why would you want to replace the scouts? They're largely responsible for selecting what many feel is the NHL's best collection of prospects.

Also don't see Calgary flipping Hamilton only a year after acquiring him.

In terms of the scouts, I believe Maloney had some say in who was hired (for a "build for the future" approach). With the new philosophy coming in, scouts aren't as important (at least for the next two seasons) since most spots will be filled by mid career players or UFAers. If I were a scout hired by Maloney, I'd probably be hunting for a new job (or waiting to see where Maloney ends up). My point is that the scouts and Maloney probably worked together aplenty, so if they thrived in a Maloney regime, they won't in a Tippuppett one.

I could see Calgary making the deal if they can fleece the Coyotes, but he'll probably remain in Calgary. I'd take Trouba (depending on what it would cost us)

 

[BlazingBlueAnt]

Scouts are still super needed because if you want to be a constant competitor you need cheap, ELC talent and talent to trade away to fill holes in the roster.

 

[Jakey53]

In terms of the scouts, I believe Maloney had some say in who was hired (for a "build for the future" approach). With the new philosophy coming in, scouts aren't as important (at least for the next two seasons) since most spots will be filled by mid career players or UFAers. If I were a scout hired by Maloney, I'd probably be hunting for a new job (or waiting to see where Maloney ends up). My point is that the scouts and Maloney probably worked together aplenty, so if they thrived in a Maloney regime, they won't in a Tippuppett one.

I could see Calgary making the deal if they can fleece the Coyotes, but he'll probably remain in Calgary. I'd take Trouba (depending on what it would cost us)

100% disagree.

Scouts are still super needed because if you want to be a constant competitor you need cheap, ELC talent and talent to trade away to fill holes in the roster.

100% agree.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

In terms of the scouts, I believe Maloney had some say in who was hired (for a "build for the future" approach). With the new philosophy coming in, scouts aren't as important (at least for the next two seasons) since most spots will be filled by mid career players or UFAers. If I were a scout hired by Maloney, I'd probably be hunting for a new job (or waiting to see where Maloney ends up). My point is that the scouts and Maloney probably worked together aplenty, so if they thrived in a Maloney regime, they won't in a Tippuppett one.

I don't agree, and I don't think even the most aggressive UFA/trade policy would negate the fact that a successful franchise needs a healthy scouting system. For proof of concept you only need to look at last year's draft and the haul we got. We have more prospects likely to hit at the NHL level than we've ever had before, and the only way to accomplish that is by being well-informed about the kids you're picking.

I don't think even IceArizona is dumb enough to gut the scouting system in the name of politics or cost savings.

 

[BUX7PHX]

In terms of the scouts, I believe Maloney had some say in who was hired (for a "build for the future" approach). With the new philosophy coming in, scouts aren't as important (at least for the next two seasons) since most spots will be filled by mid career players or UFAers. If I were a scout hired by Maloney, I'd probably be hunting for a new job (or waiting to see where Maloney ends up). My point is that the scouts and Maloney probably worked together aplenty, so if they thrived in a Maloney regime, they won't in a Tippuppett one.

I could see Calgary making the deal if they can fleece the Coyotes, but he'll probably remain in Calgary. I'd take Trouba (depending on what it would cost us)

Not sure I understand this "new philosophy" that will be taken on.

Going by what has been printed, the talk has been that Tippett was actually for keeping Strome up and Maloney was against. I am certain that the issue on the Boedker deal wasn't so much the deadline, but the fact that for years, we could have had Boedker available on a much more cost-aligned deal (regardless of belief on the impact he has).

So, I think it is a fair statement that right now, we are going to see some younger players get strong looks, whether that is Strome alone or combinations of players like Dvorak, Perlini, Samuelsson, and many others. As a result of being on ELCs, reaching the cap floor will require spending a little more heavily on other areas, namely the defensive side.

The new philosophy will be re-allocating dollars to certain areas, whereas Maloney's philosophy was to avoid the potential for a higher-priced contract by keeping the youth in the farm, relative to what Tippett or others were requesting. Instead of spending $5.5 M on a top end D per year, we would get $3 M towards a middling D and $2.5 M for a nice forward, but not one with the potential and learning curve of the rookies.

We are still going to invest in the scouts for the future and identify the necessary talent. I think that people are way over-estimating this concept that Tippett and others are going to turn the team upside down and potentially trade away certain players for the short term. If trades do involve younger players, we will have done our homework on which will and which won't be effective players in the near future.

 

[Jakey53]

Not sure I understand this "new philosophy" that will be taken on.

Going by what has been printed, the talk has been that Tippett was actually for keeping Strome up and Maloney was against. I am certain that the issue on the Boedker deal wasn't so much the deadline, but the fact that for years, we could have had Boedker available on a much more cost-aligned deal (regardless of belief on the impact he has).

So, I think it is a fair statement that right now, we are going to see some younger players get strong looks, whether that is Strome alone or combinations of players like Dvorak, Perlini, Samuelsson, and many others. As a result of being on ELCs, reaching the cap floor will require spending a little more heavily on other areas, namely the defensive side.

The new philosophy will be re-allocating dollars to certain areas, whereas Maloney's philosophy was to avoid the potential for a higher-priced contract by keeping the youth in the farm, relative to what Tippett or others were requesting. Instead of spending $5.5 M on a top end D per year, we would get $3 M towards a middling D and $2.5 M for a nice forward, but not one with the potential and learning curve of the rookies.

We are still going to invest in the scouts for the future and identify the necessary talent. I think that people are way over-estimating this concept that Tippett and others are going to turn the team upside down and potentially trade away certain players for the short term. If trades do involve younger players, we will have done our homework on which will and which won't be effective players in the near future.

Good post.

 

[YotesFan47]

Based on the comments it kinda seems like most of you still have the same outlook for our targets even with new management coming in. I think I'm with XX on the Demers acquisition, he seems like he's the UFA we should be targeting above all else. We could always grab him and flip Stone with something else for that LD we need (mostly because the market looks bleak on LHD).

 

[XX]

Based on the comments it kinda seems like most of you still have the same outlook for our targets even with new management coming in. I think I'm with XX on the Demers acquisition, he seems like he's the UFA we should be targeting above all else. We could always grab him and flip Stone with something else for that LD we need (mostly because the market looks bleak on LHD).

Stone's injury changes everything. He's frozen, essentially. His value is very low right now until it's known how that injury plays out with his game. If you got Demers, he'd simply bump Z off the third pairing down to #7. If we're honest, Z is too old and slow to be an everyday player. He's not physical enough to offset his lack of transition game. Ideally, I would trade him to where his brother ends up, or a market he is comfortable with.

Left side is really the area of need right now.

 

[Heldig]

How bad was Stone's injury? Is it an ACL?

 

[XX]

How bad was Stone's injury? Is it an ACL?

ACL and MCL.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

How bad was Stone's injury? Is it an ACL?

Six months minimum recovery. Tore through both his ACL and MCL.

 

[Ebb]

100% disagree.

Thank you for sharing your 100% disagreement; so, from your perspective:

• Maloney had no say in who was hired as scouts
• There is no new philosophy with the team
• Scouts are important for the next 2 years
• Few roster spots will be given to mid-career or UFA players
• None of the current scouts are looking at finding new jobs
• No scouts would want to work under Maloney again
• Maloney didn't work with team scouts
• All current scouts will get along swimingly with Tippuppett/groupthink
• Calgary wouldn't move Hamilton if they could fleece the Coyotes
• Trouba is not worth acquiring

Perhaps you only 30-40% disagree with me

 

[XX]

Going by what has been printed, the talk has been that Tippett was actually for keeping Strome up and Maloney was against.

That would be another big mark against Tippett if true.

 

[BUX7PHX]

That would be another big mark against Tippett if true.

Not sure I understand this.

The same coach who was "supposedly" against all youth actually wanted a young player on the team. First, it is how much you dislike Tippett b/c of his unwillingness to play youth. Then, when it is made known that Tippett wanted to keep Strome up, you say that is a mark against Tippett.

Which side are you on?

I digress, but I think that what Tippett wanted was to keep Strome up, but use money to get a much stronger defensive player through signing or trade. We got Grossmann and Vermette. We could have had Strome as the C, and used the additional $2-3 million difference to get a much better player than Grossmann.

Mike Green? Andrej Sekera? Trade for some different players?

 

[KG]

Strome is this franchise's most important prospect, you don't risk rushing a talent like that.

There hasn't been a time that has won the cup w/o a #1 center, let's be clear about that.

 

[Jakey53]

Not sure I understand this.

The same coach who was "supposedly" against all youth actually wanted a young player on the team. First, it is how much you dislike Tippett b/c of his unwillingness to play youth. Then, when it is made known that Tippett wanted to keep Strome up, you say that is a mark against Tippett.

Which side are you on?

I digress, but I think that what Tippett wanted was to keep Strome up, but use money to get a much stronger defensive player through signing or trade. We got Grossmann and Vermette. We could have had Strome as the C, and used the additional $2-3 million difference to get a much better player than Grossmann.

Mike Green? Andrej Sekera? Trade for some different players?

Consider the source and you will understand.

 

[Jakey53]

Strome is this franchise's most important prospect, you don't risk rushing a talent like that.

There hasn't been a time that has won the cup w/o a #1 center, let's be clear about that.

We have never had a talent like Strome. I thought Strome made the team out of camp.

 

[rt]

That would be another big mark against Tippett if true.

Totally agree. That's a rushing mentality that got us to this ****** spot.

 

[rt]

Strome is this franchise's most important prospect, you don't risk rushing a talent like that.

There hasn't been a time that has won the cup w/o a #1 center, let's be clear about that.

Yep. No doubt. Maloney's shift to "overcook" prospects was accurate and too long coming.

Some on this board don't understand the difference between young NHL players getting their proper reps and learning on the job versus rushing and ruining blue chips before they're ready. It's not the most difficult distinction to make. But some people struggle with even the basic of concepts.

 

[rt]

ACL and MCL.

Not going to act like that isn't terrible. But it's not like it was ten years ago. Plus, Stone doesn't much rely on foot speed. Though, he does ALREADY struggle with the quickness of the game. So it doesn't bode well. Still, if he can be a bigger, meaner, slower bottom pairing guy with his shot and offensive instincts on the 2nd PP unit and 3rd pair 5v5, he's still a decent nhler. And a good 3rd pair with Caunnoton.

 

[Matias Maccete]

Not going to act like that isn't terrible. But it's not like it was ten years ago. Plus, Stone doesn't much rely on foot speed. Though, he does ALREADY struggle with the quickness of the game. So it doesn't bode well. Still, if he can be a bigger, meaner, slower bottom pairing guy with his shot and offensive instincts on the 2nd PP unit and 3rd pair 5v5, he's still a decent nhler. And a good 3rd pair with Caunnoton.

Yup, I think if we have a third pairing of kconn and stone a first pairing of oel and murphy is fine. We would need an entire second pairing in that situation though. Even better would be getting trouba to shift murphy down and signing yandle. That would be a damn solid blueline.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Strome is this franchise's most important prospect, you don't risk rushing a talent like that.

There hasn't been a time that has won the cup w/o a #1 center, let's be clear about that.

Depends on the maturity level of the player. Given, the only comparison that we have with very high draft picks at the C spot are Strome and Turris, so I understand feeling that it is a risk when the only comparison ran himself out of town.

 

[SniperHF]

I'm not too hung up on Strone up vs Strome in Junior and who thought what and if there was even a disagreement (which I doubt). The right call was made given his skating.

 

[XX]

Not sure I understand this.

The same coach who was "supposedly" against all youth actually wanted a young player on the team. First, it is how much you dislike Tippett b/c of his unwillingness to play youth. Then, when it is made known that Tippett wanted to keep Strome up, you say that is a mark against Tippett.

Which side are you on?

It's pretty clear what side I'm on.

Strome wasn't ready. You're turning the context of an entire situation into a yes/no question, which tends to happen on a lot on this forum with certain posters. Please stop.

Physically, he wasn't there. I find it odd and not that believable that DT would be for keeping him up, but I'm glad it wasn't his decision. If he had a problem with Maloney sending Strome back or thought that was "tanking" then I just have to laugh at Dino Dave. Rushing your clearly not ready 3rd overall pick should terrify you. That the person who wanted to do so was given more power and managed to get the only guy pushing back on him fired should terrify you even more.

 

[BlazingBlueAnt]

It's pretty clear what side I'm on.

Strome wasn't ready. You're turning the context of an entire situation into a yes/no question, which tends to happen on a lot on this forum with certain posters. Please stop.

Physically, he wasn't there. I find it odd and not that believable that DT would be for keeping him up, but I'm glad it wasn't his decision. If he had a problem with Maloney sending Strome back or thought that was "tanking" then I just have to laugh at Dino Dave. Rushing your clearly not ready 3rd overall pick should terrify you. That the person who wanted to do so was given more power and managed to get the only guy pushing back on him fired should terrify you even more.

It's not like we've ever rushed a physically underdeveloped 3rd OV before

Different scenarios I guess tho